Admissibility of inquiry statements and electronic printouts in customs adjudication requires witness examination and cross-examination before relianc...
Page of 4816
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6921 to 6940 of 96301 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Statements recorded under s.108 of the Customs Act were held inadmissible because the department did not examine the makers as witnesses, failing the mandatory conditions of s.138B(1)(b); consequently, adjudication and penalty proceedings could not be sustained on such statements, and denial of cross-examination violated the "reasonable opportunity" under s.122A. The contention that absence of s.108 statements bars noticees from objecting was rejected as the statute creates no adverse inference for non-recording; the issue was answered against the revenue. Other framed questions were rendered unnecessary, and the appeals were dismissed. - HC
Statements recorded under s.108 of the Customs Act were held inadmissible because the department did not examine the makers as witnesses, failing the mandatory conditions of s.138B(1)(b); consequently, adjudication and penalty proceedings could not be sustained on such statements, and denial of cross-examination violated the "reasonable opportunity" under s.122A. The contention that absence of s.108 statements bars noticees from objecting was rejected as the statute creates no adverse inference for non-recording; the issue was answered against the revenue. Other framed questions were rendered unnecessary, and the appeals were dismissed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.