TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (12) TMI 163
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ier of the goods namely switches, which were cleared provisionally. 2. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai and the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai, after hearing the appeal, set aside the order and remanded the matter back to the original authorities for de novo enquiry. The Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Group 5-A, on remand initiated the proceedings de novo and issued notices on various dates calling upon the petitioner to appear for personal hearing. It is recorded in the order under challenge that the petitioner failed to appear on the dates mentioned and therefore the authority had no other option except to proceeds further. 3. Paragrap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... petition. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner primarily challenges the order on the ground that no notice of personal hearing was served on the petitioner and therefore, there was a denial of opportunity. Consequently, violation of principles of natural justice is pleaded. The order dated 07.03.2012 was despatched on 07/08.03.2012 and the same was not served on the petitioner and therefore great prejudice and hardship is caused. 6. It is also the plea of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order came to be served on a non-existent address and besides it was not served on the proper person. Therefore, it is not a service in accordance with Section 153 of the Customs Act and hence, this Court sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er and effective service. 8. The learned counsel for the respondents produced the original file to repel the above plea and contended as follows:- Order-in-Original No.7688/2008-Gr.5B passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, (Gr.5B and C) was based on the petitioner's address of M/s.ETA General Pvt. Ltd., Seethakathi Chambers, 5th Floor, 688, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 006, which is as per record. Appeal also was filed before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai, on 14.08.2008 showing the address as M/s.ETA General Pvt. Ltd., Seethakathi Chambers, 5th Floor, 688, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 006. Column No.5, which deals with notice to be sent to the appellant, also contains the address as ETA General Pvt. Ltd., Seeth....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ept the plea of violation of principles of natural justice or violation of Section 153 of the Customs Act. 1) Section 153 of the Customs Act reads as follows:- "153.Service of order, decision, etc.- Any order or decision passed or any summons or notice issued under this Act, shall be served- (a) by tendering the order, decision, summons or notice or sending it by registered post to the person for whom it is intended or to his agent; or (b) if the order, decision, summons or notice cannot be served in the manner provided in clause (a), by affixing it on the notice board of the customs house." 11. In this case, the address, which was shown in the impugned proceedings, viz., ETA General Pvt. Ltd., See....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l hearing was granted and the petitioner failed to appear. The notices are also part of the record. The notices clearly show the address as ETA General Pvt. Ltd., Seethakathi Chambers, 5th Floor, 688, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 006. Therefore, the respondents have sent the notices to the correct address as per the records and they cannot be faulted. Failure to appear in response to the notice is the peril of the petitioner, and consequences follow. 14. One other aspect which has to be considered against the petitioner and in favour of the department is that, assuming without admitting that the department knew the other address of the petitioner in other proceedings, it is of no consequence. The department will deal with each file sep....