2007 (12) TMI 51

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ure to appear for hearing of the Appeal. However, dismissal was without touching merits of the case. Ld. Consultant appearing for the Appellant prays that order passed by the Tribunal dismissing appeal has seriously prejudiced the poor CHA who was penalized by an amount of Rs. 25,000/- when he was not actively .connected with the allegation made against the importer. He further submitted that ther....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ities below. His further submission was that such a matter having been decided by Tribunal in the case of Somaiya Shipping Clearing Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai - 2006 (197) E.L.T. 552 (Tri-Mumbai), the Appellant should not be unequally dealt under the law. 2. The ld. JDR appearing for Revenue submitted that the Appellant having been given enough opportunity for hearing o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... this forum fixing hearing of appeal and pre-deposit although was made by Appellant on 19-7-2006 non-compliance was recorded by Tribunal. Notice was not served on the Appellant before the time of hearing but exactly on the day of hearing the notice was served which prevented the litigant to appeal and plead its case. The envelope copy that formed part of Restoration Application proves such fact. T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....record without any cogent evidence to contradict entire modus operandi of the Appellant which calls for proper interference. Essential ingredient of the Section 112(b) is that the person carrying out the activities enumerated in that clause if had conscious knowledge or every cogent reason to believe that the goods in question were liable to confiscation under Section 111, shall only meet penal co....