9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 'Addl. DGFT'). It would be appropriate to scan through the relevant facts, in the first instance, which led to passing of the aforesaid orders. 3.The appellant has a marble processing unit at Makrana and three independent 100 per cent export oriented units, processing and exporting cut and polished granite tiles and slabs at Bangalore, Hosur and Nalgonda. In respect of its Nalgonda unit at Andhra Pradesh a show cause notice dated 25th March, 1996 was issued by the Addl. DGFT based on the report of the Development Commissioner, ZEP, Visakhapatnam that this unit made exports to the extent of Rs. 73.02 lacs only as against an export obligation of Rs. 30.42 crores. Ultimately, it resulted in an ex parte adjudication order dated 6th April, 199 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The learned Single Judge further observed that a bare perusal of the order shows that repeated efforts were made to serve the appellant who was in fact served and it was not necessary to give notice for each date of hearing. It was further found that the appellant was aware of the proceedings which fact was not even disputed by the Counsel for the appellant herein. The learned Single Judge also found that the plea taken by the appellant in Para 3 of the writ petition was in contradiction to the plea taken by the Counsel for the appellant in his letter dated 1st December, 1997 regarding non-appearance on particular dates. 6.In sofar as second contention of the appellant is concerned, the learned Single Judge held that when the Appellate C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the O/o Jt. DGFT, Hyderabad, Bangalore/Bombay for personal delivery. O/o Jt. DGFT, Bangalore, could personally deliver the show cause notice to the firm at their address, 209, Raheja Chambers, 12-Museum Road, Bangalore, and took receipt of the same. Since there was no reply to the show cause notice, I decided to call the party for personal hearing on 6-12-96. The letter dated 3-10-96, to this effect was issued to the noticee firm at their Bangalore and Bombay address. Again the letter addressed to their Bombay address was received back undelivered from the postal authorities. As no one from the noticee firm's side appeared before me on the date of personal hearing, I decided to give one more opportunity of P.H. for 4-7-97. Letter informin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reveals that the appellant through its Counsel had written letter dated 1st December, 1997 addressed to Foreign Trade Development Officer informing that the appellant could not appear on 1st September, 1997 because of the reason that the mother of the Counsel was undergoing surgical operation. This letter further states that the Counsel had appeared on previous two dates i.e. 4th July and 1st September, 1997 but the matter could not be taken up on those dates as the Presiding Officer was busy/on leave. In these circumstances, request was made in its communication for fixing further date. This shows that the appellant was receiving the communications for appearance and was aware of the proceedings before the Addl. DGFT. Thereafter, the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the appellant in not availing of these opportunities. For this appellant has to blame itself. The appellant cannot now turn around and blame the respondents by alleging that the Addl. DGFT violated principles of natural justice or did not give sufficient opportunity to the appellant to present its case. 10.Insofar as second contention is concerned, before appreciating this contention, it would be appropriate to refer to the appeal memo and the grounds of appeal on which the order passed by the Addl. DGFT was challenged before the Appellate Committee. A reading thereof would show that the main case put up by the appellant was that the order imposing the penalty of Rs. 50 lacs was erroneous and without jurisdiction inasmuch as the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce the Appellate Committee did not find any infirmity in the original impugned order and was upholding the said order on the basis of reasons given by the Addl. DGFT, it was not necessary for it to state the same reasons all over again. Although it would have been appropriate for the Appellate Committee to deal with the aforesaid contentions of the appellant herein and give some reasons for rejecting the same, however, keeping in view the fact that these contentions of the appellant are dealt with by us on merits as well, no purpose would be served in remanding the case back to the Appellate Committee for passing a speaking order. 11.In view of the foregoing discussion, we find no merit in this appeal. Appeal and CM stand dismissed. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
