Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2018 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (5) TMI 454 - HC - CustomsPrinciples of natural justice - main grievance of the Writ Petitioner before the Writ Court is that they were not given an opportunity to cross-examine any witness - under-valuation - Held that: - When the show-cause notice was issued with certain allegations of mis-declaration of the value, reply to the show-cause notice should meet the such allegations and state specifically as to how such allegations are factually and legally not correct or sustainable - In this case, the Adjudicating Authority has pointed out that no such contention was raised in the reply to the show-cause notice as well as in the written submission made during the personal hearing. Whether the contentions raised by the Petitioner before Adjudicating Authority are sufficient and consequently, based on those reply and the written submission whether the Petitioner is entitled to cross-examination of witnesses is certainly a matter for the next fact finding authority viz., The Tribunal to consider and decide and not for this court while exercising the discretionary jurisdiction of Article 226 of the Constitution of India - the question of violation of principles of natural justice as raised in this case, cannot be decided without going into the merits of the matter, more particularly, without appreciation of the materials placed before the Adjudicating Authority and hence, the contention of the writ petitioner that, in this case, there is a clear-cut violation of principles of natural justice, cannot be accepted. Maintainability of petition - alternative remedy - Held that: - It is well settled that in a case involving fiscal nature, availing of statutory appellate remedy has to be first exhausted and hence, the party cannot come to this Court directly and file a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India - the filing of the very writ petition itself against the order of the Adjudicating Authority is not maintainable, as the appellant/writ petitioner is having statutory and efficacious appellate remedy before the appellate Tribunal, in this case, CESTAT. Appeal disposed off.
|