9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (1) TMI 238X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, the appellants had questioned the authenticity and reliability of the report of GEQD. In order to establish that the GEQD report was not reliable they sought to examine the author of the report – held that - order has been passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice - it was not fair on the part of the adjudicating authority to have passed the adjudication order without consideri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustoms Act (the 'Act')on the proprietor of M/s. Sai Crafts Shri S. Namasivayam. A quantity of 4822 Kg. of components of artificial flowers of value of Rs. 4,79,506/- seized from the premises of M/s. Sai Crafts was confiscated u/s 111(d) and (m) of the Act and offered to be redeemed on payment of a fine of Rs. 4 lakhs. 2. After hearing both sides on the stay application for sometime we find that i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unsel submits that in a similar case where the report of the GEQD was relied upon, the same adjudicating authority had allowed the request of the noticees therein to examine the GEQD. In the instant case the appellants came to know that their request to cross-examine the GEQD was denied only when the impugned order was received. It is submitted that the matter may be remanded for fresh adjudicatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne the GEQD. Appellants were not informed of the decision to deny the cross-examination and the reasons therefor before the case was decided. In the circumstances we set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the adjudicating authority to decide the case afresh after considering the request for cross-examination of the GEQD made by the appellants. Needless to say that a fresh decision sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
