Personal hearing requirement must be satisfied by the deciding authority before imposing penalty; order set aside without remand.

Where a personal hearing is mandated under the Adjudication Proceedings and Appeal Rules, 1974, the adjudicating authority that finally decides the matter must itself afford and consider that hearing before passing the penalty order. On the facts, the order was unsustainable because the hearing had been conducted by one officer but the final decision was made by another. A remand for fresh hearing was declined in view of the long lapse of time, prior customs proceedings and confiscation concerning the same material, and the absence of corroboration for one allegation, so the proceedings were brought to an end without further remand.

---

---

Issues: Whether the adjudication order imposing penalty for foreign exchange violations was liable to be set aside because the personal hearing required under the Adjudication Proceedings and Appeal Rules, 1974 was not held by the officer who finally passed the order, and whether the matter should be remanded for a fresh hearing.

Analysis: The appellant had been heard by one Deputy Director, but the impugned order was ultimately passed by another officer who had not conducted the personal hearing. The requirement of personal hearing under rule 3 was treated as one that had to be satisfied by the adjudicating authority itself before deciding the matter. In the peculiar facts, a remand was considered unjustified in view of the long lapse of time, the earlier customs proceedings and confiscation relating to the same material, and the lack of corroboration for one of the allegations. The Court therefore treated further continuation of the proceedings as not serving the interests of justice.

Conclusion: The adjudication order was unsustainable and the appeal was allowed; the matter was not remanded for fresh hearing.

Final Conclusion: The penalty order was set aside on the ground that the adjudicating authority had not complied with the personal hearing requirement, and the proceedings were brought to an end without further remand.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a personal hearing is mandated, the adjudicating authority that ultimately decides the matter must itself afford and consider that hearing before passing the order.

---