9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Per: C J Mathew The challenge to order-in-original no. CC-MJ/04/2009 Adj. ACC dated 30th January 2010 of Commissioner of Customs (Import), Air Cargo Complex, Mumbai is in dispute before us for the second time and the appellant, Shri Dhiru A Shah, contends that the impugned order is flawed in not having taken their submissions into consideration while adjudicating the notice. 2. Proceedings w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant and the latter of whom claimed to have been connected to the importer through the appellant, was essential. Though it is contended by the Learned Counsel that the issues on merit had also been noted by the Tribunal on the former occasion, we do not observe such findings on that score in the remand order which was limited to rehearing of the appeal with direction to decide on the ple ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recorded in the impugned order but also not denied in the present proceedings. 5. It is now claimed by Learned Counsel that the opportunities afforded were very restrictive and that the co-accused was held to be beyond the pale of such cross-examination which rendered the decision of the Tribunal inoperative. We cannot find fault with the ruling of the original authority that co-accused could not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r did not have to proceed in merit in view of the failure of the appellant to participate in the proceedings as directed in the remand order of the Tribunal to subject the evidence to test. By failure to participate in the cross-examination, there is an implicit admission of the relevancy of these statements. 7. In these circumstances, we find ourselves unable to grant any relief to the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
