9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 607X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lore with a direction to consider and verify all the facts and aspects before passing the order and to pass the order within four weeks of receipt of this order. Further, I reject appeals bearing A.No.10/2018. Cus (B-Air) dt. 30/01/2018, A.No.28/2018 Cus (B-Air) and 29/2018 Cus (B-Air) both dated 01/03/2018 filed by (1) m/S. Barani Trading, (C/o Sri Shaju. K, Proprietor), #42/1, Radhika's Nest, 9th Street, Tatabad, Coimbatore-641 012 (2) M/s. Bharti Trading Company, (C/o Sri Amjad Shibli Konari, Proprietor), #2, Davana Site No.182, 15th Cross, Telecom Layout, Bangalore - 560 064 and (3) Sh. K. Naser alias Bapu Nazir, Kollancheri House Chemmad, Tirurangadi (PO), Mallapuram, Kerala - 676 306 being not sustainable on merits. I uphold the appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns revealed that importer-I had earlier imported 45 consignments of the impugned goods (43 consignments through ACC, Coimbatore and 2 consignments through ACC, Cochin respectively). It was noticed that all the said consignments were imported from UAE and the exporter was on M/s. KFQ FZE, UAE and the consignments were cleared under RSP valuation. DRI, Bangalore concluded that similar concealment of gold would have been done in the 45 consignments of importer-II. The said gold and impugned goods were seized under a Mahazar dt. 11/05/2016. On these allegations, show-cause notices were issued to (i) Shri Amjad Shibli Konari, Proprietor of M/s. Bharti Trading Company, (ii) Shri K. Nasser, (iii) Shri Shaju.K, Proprietor of M/s. Barani Trading and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opportunities were given but none of the dates were mentioned and even the counsel's name also was not mentioned which clearly shows that no opportunity was given to the appellant and the impugned order clearly violates the principles of natural justice. The learned counsel also submitted that as soon as he received the Order-in- Appeal, thereafter he sent a letter to the Commissioner(Appeals) under RTI Act asking them to furnish the details about the communication hearing notices, acknowledgment etc. before deciding the case ex parte. He further submits that in response to their RTI application, the Department informed the appellant that person hearing was granted on 19/04/2018 and 20/04/2018. He further submitted that in reply to the RTI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/04/2018 and the intimation was given on 11/04/2018 which was never received by the appellants. Further I find that no intimation was given to the counsel whose address is given in the appeal paper books given to the Commissioner. The entire impugned order has been passed in clear violation of the principles of natural justice and no hearing was given to the appellant or his counsel and the impugned order has been passed ex parte. Therefore I am of the considered view that this case needs to be remanded to the Commissioner(Appeals) with a direction to pass de novo order after complying with the principles of natural justice and after affording an opportunity of hearing and opportunity to produce any evidence which the appellants may produc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
