Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2021 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (4) TMI 692 - HC - CustomsViolation of principles of Natural justice - opportunity of hearing not granted - Revocation of Custom Duty Exemption Certificate (CDEC) - import of certain medical equipments exempt from customs duty by N/N. 64/88-Cus. Dated 1.3.1988 - consideration of the decision in the case of Sir Gangaram Trust Society and another Vs. Union of India and Others [2007 (10) TMI 645 - SUPREME COURT] - HELD THAT:- A plain reading of the Order passed by the first respondent clearly shows that proper opportunity has not been granted by the first respondent to the appellants in considering their case - The documents which were furnished by the appellants to the first respondent before this court, which are annexed to the Appeal Memorandum running approximately 200 documents have not been mentioned in the Order passed by the first respondent, let alone being considered or discussed. The Order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Gangaram's case clearly mentioned that the first respondent was duty bound to consider the case of the appellant in accordance with law. Further, the first respondent was a party before this court in Writ Appeal. When this court has clearly passed an order referred, it was for the first respondent to consider the case of the appellant judiciously by affording opportunity for the appellant to establish that they have complied with all the eight conditions and therefore, they were entitled for the exemption of the customs duty. The first respondent has not considered the case of the appellants or not even discussed the materials placed by the appellants before it. The first respondent being the quasi judicial authority was duty bound to consider the materials placed before it in its proper perspective and should have passed a speaking order assigning the reasons - the first respondent has failed to do so in the case on hand. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|