Imposition of penalties on the appellants u/ss 112(a) and 114AA ...

Customs penalties overturned due to denial of cross-examination, inadmissible evidence, and lack of mala fide intent.

December 4, 2024

Case Laws Customs AT

Imposition of penalties on the appellants u/ss 112(a) and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. The adjudicating authority failed to consider the appellants' request for cross-examination of witnesses, violating the principles of natural justice. The statements relied upon were inadmissible as evidence u/s 138B, requiring examination and cross-examination of witnesses. Furthermore, the electronic documents lacked the requisite certificate u/s 138C, rendering them inadmissible. Crucially, no mala fide act or omission was established to warrant penalties u/ss 112(a) and 114AA. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order upholding the penalties.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Imposition of penalties on the appellants u/ss 112(a) and 114AA ...

Customs penalties overturned due to denial of cross-examination, inadmissible evidence, and lack of mala fide intent.

December 4, 2024

Case Laws Customs AT

You may also like:

Violation of principles of natural justice - denial of cross-examination - revocation of customs broker license, forfeiture of security deposit, and penalty imposed by...

The AT rejected appellant's contention that denial of cross-examination of departmental officers violated natural justice principles. The tribunal distinguished between...

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) set aside the impugned order and remanded the cases back to the adjudicating authority. The appellants...

Clandestine removal of excisable goods alleged based on statements recorded from partners, employees, and buyers. Section 9D of Central Excise Act mandates...

HC held that both appellants must be given opportunity to cross-examine witness Mr. B under Section 138(B) of Customs Act, addressing discriminatory treatment by CESTAT...

Principles of Natural Justice - Levy of Penalty - It is no doubt true that there is no right of cross-examination if sufficient corroborative evidence exists, but in the...

The AT dismissed the appeals challenging denial of cross-examination requests for officers who recorded statements under the Customs Act and FERA. The tribunal...

Denial of cross-examination process of witness - ACIT restricted cross examination process by denying the questions asked by the Petitioner during cross examination -...

The High Court addressed a case involving a violation of natural justice principles due to the rejection of the petitioner's request for cross-examination in a matter...

Seizure of tobacco and loss of the same due to file - Liability of central excise department - Whether the Trial Court has committed error of facts and law in passing...

Validity of reassessment order u/s 147 - Denial of Cross-Examination Opportunity - Reliance of statement of third party - The High Court noted that the petitioner did...

Imposition of penalty u/s 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 - fraudulent import in the name of dummy IECs with mis-declaration in description and value inputs - Abetment -...

The summary focuses on the rejection of cross-examination of DRI officers and a co-noticee by the competent authority. The main objective of cross-examination is to...

Principles of natural justice - rejection of cross-examination - The petitioner has approached this Court prematurely as the respondents have only rejected the request...

This case pertains to an alleged offense under FEMA involving bogus purported exports with inflated invoices to obtain export benefits, where the goods never reached the...

Quick Updates: