1998 (7) TMI 349 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Waiver of pre-deposit of penalty imposed on the appellant.
2. Adequacy of notice and opportunity of personal hearing provided to the appellant.
3. Compliance with principles of natural justice in the adjudication process.

Analysis:
1. The appellant sought waiver of pre-deposit of penalty amounting to Rs. 10 lakhs, contending that the proceedings initiated against him were based on statements of individuals intercepted with the goods, claiming the goods belonged to the appellant and another person. The appellant argued that being detained under COFEPOSA, the notice of personal hearing sent to his residential address, instead of the detention location, resulted in a denial of an effective hearing, leading to a failure of justice. The appellant emphasized the lack of a granted hearing and denial of allegations in his statement as grounds for waiving the penalty.

2. The respondent opposed the waiver request, asserting that the statements of the intercepted individuals clearly identified the appellant, providing his full address independently. The respondent highlighted that the appellant received the show-cause notice (SCN) at his residential address and submitted a reply without requesting further notices at his detention address. The respondent argued that the appellant had the opportunity for a personal hearing, which he did not avail, leading to the imposition of the penalty by the lower authorities based on evidence and the goods' value.

3. Upon hearing both sides, the Tribunal acknowledged the appellant's detention during the relevant period, emphasizing that the service of notice at his residential address for personal hearing was inadequate. Recognizing personal hearing as a fundamental aspect of natural justice to explain charges, the Tribunal deemed the case fit for remand. Consequently, the Tribunal dispensed with the pre-deposit of penalty and remanded the case to the adjudicating authority to afford the appellant a proper opportunity to be heard in person, present his case, and issue appropriate orders in accordance with the law. The stay petition and appeal were disposed of with the aforementioned directions to ensure compliance with the principles of natural justice in the adjudication process.