TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1026X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the absence of any reasoning for denying the opportunity of cross-examination the case of Shri Prahlad Agarwal is required to be remanded back to the Adjudicating authority for making efforts to extend the cross-examination of the witnesses whose statements are relied upon by the investigation for penal action against the Appellant. Appeal of Shri Prahlad Agarwal is allowed by way of remand to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder-in-Original No.28/CUS/CC(P)/WB/2007 dated 18.12.2007 under which penalties have been imposed upon the Appellants under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 by the Commissioner of Customs(Prev.), West Bengal, Kolkata as Adjudicating authority. 2. None appeared for the Appellant Shri Subhas Oraon, upon whom a penalty of ₹ 20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand only) was imposed. 3. Shri Su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xamination of the witnesses was asked by the Appellant. 4. Shri S.N. Mitra, AC(AR) appeared on behalf of the Revenue and argued that Appellant Shri Prahlad Agarwal never co-operated with the investigation and the summons issued to him was never responded. It was his case that under the circumstances Adjudicating authority was not required to extend any cross-examination of witnesses to the Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n against the Appellant. Appeal of Shri Prahlad Agarwal is allowed by way of remand to the Adjudicating authority to decide the issue afresh after extending cross-examination of the relied upon witnesses and also by giving an opportunity to the Appellant to explain his case. 7. The other Appellant Shri Subhas Oraon did not attend the hearing fixed on 14.09.2016 before this Bench. There is also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
