Additional evidence before forfeiture tribunal must be considered where needed for a just decision under Rule 15.

Under Rule 15 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, additional evidence may be admitted where it is necessary for a just decision or where substantial cause exists. The burden remained on the person affected by a forfeiture notice to show lawful acquisition of the properties, but the Tribunal could not reject further evidence on technical grounds without considering whether it was needed to enable proper adjudication. As the Tribunal failed to assess the affidavit and proposed evidence on that basis, the refusal was unsustainable. The appellant was entitled to a fresh opportunity to adduce evidence before the Tribunal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant should have been permitted to adduce additional evidence before the Appellate Tribunal under Rule 15 of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property) Rules, 1977.

Analysis: The burden to establish that the properties were lawfully acquired lay on the person affected by the notice under Section 8 of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976. Although the Rules generally prohibit additional evidence before the Tribunal, Rule 15 permits it where the Tribunal requires such evidence to enable it to pass orders or where there is substantial cause. The Tribunal also has powers akin to a civil court and is expected to ensure that justice is done on the appeal. In the facts, the competent authority had afforded an opportunity, but the Tribunal did not consider whether the affidavit and further evidence sought to be produced were necessary for a just decision under Rule 15(a), and instead refused the evidence on technical grounds. The proper course was to allow the appellant an opportunity to produce the evidence and then decide the appeal on the material actually placed before it.

Conclusion: The refusal to permit additional evidence was unsustainable, and the appellant was entitled to a fresh opportunity to adduce evidence before the Tribunal.

---