New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (11) TMI 1459 - CESTAT KOLKATA

2015 (11) TMI 1459 - CESTAT KOLKATA - 2016 (343) E.L.T. 625 (Tri. - Kolkata) - Penalty under section 114(iii) and section 114AA - involvement in inflating the export price and the purchase documents in respect of synthetic fabric being exported under the DEPB scheme with intention to avail the higher incentive - Held that:- Granting three consecutive days of hearing i.e. at short intervals of a week or so cannot be considered as the reasonable opportunity afforded to the appellant before decidin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e appellant with the direction that the ld.Commissioner shall decide the case afresh after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellant - Decided in favour of assessee. - Stay Petition No.SP-70991/13 & Appeal Nos.Cus.Ap.76541/14 & 70966/13 - ORDER NO.FO/A/75269-75270/2015 - Dated:- 12-5-2015 - Dr. D.M. Misra, Member(Judicial) And Dr.I.P.Lal, Member(Technical) For the Petitioner : Shri Udayan Ganguly, Consultant For the Respondent : Shri S.Sharma, Commr.(A.R.) ORDER Per Dr.I.P.Lal. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in inflating the export price and the purchase documents in respect of synthetic fabric being exported under the DEPB scheme with intention to avail the higher incentive. It is the submission that being aggrieved the appellant filed Writ Petition No.506 of 2013 before the Honble High Court of Calcutta as the impugned order was passed without providing to the appellant, a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The High Court vide order dated 19.11.2014 disposed of the Writ Petition with a direction .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the said authorities even though repeated summons were issued to them. Since they did not cooperate with the investigation and did not attend the hearing, the ld.Commissioner has no choice, but to adjudicate the case on the basis of the available records. He produced before the Bench a copy of letter dated 29.11.2012 informing the appellant, the three consecutive days of hearing, but the appellant did not bother to attend the personal hearing. 5.1 We find that as per direction of the court, the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bserve that three consecutive dates of hearing were informed as 06.12.2012/ 11.12.2012/ 18.12.2012. It however noticed from the order that the matter was heard by the ld.adjudicating authority on 14.01.2013. The order is silent whether the appellant was informed about the said hearing. 5.2 At the time of hearing the ld.Consultant has invited attention of the Bench to letter dated 26.07.2011 appearing at page 68 of the appeal paper book wherein Smt.Pinkey Gupta, wife of the appellant has informed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version