TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1995 (7) TMI 429
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... A notice dated 28.6.1994 under Section 124 of the Customs Act was served upon the concerned persons including the petitioner which is contained in Annexure 'A' to the Writ Petition. 3. The said notice also contained statements of fact. It was categorically stated therein: The written reply in this Show Cause Notice should be submitted within 30 (thirty) days from the date of its issue to the Additional Collector Customs (Prev.), West Bengal, Calcutta, M.S. Building, 5th Floor, Customs House, 15/1, Strand Road, Calcutta - 700 001. If they so desire, they may on any working day during the next 30 days inspect and make copies of statements and documents cited in this notice relevant to this case either personally or through thei....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... affidavit, this is to inform you that the said affidavit were prepared before the Notary in Berhampur by Samir Sarkar and Shri Karunamoy Paul in their personal capacity and no copies were submitted by them to this office. Hence this Office is unable to furnish you copies of the same. 6. The petitioner reiterated his earlier request in his letter dated 22.7.1994 which is contained in Annexure 'F to the Writ Petition. 7. Mr. Kashi Kanta Maitra, ld. Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, inter alia, submitted that from a perusal of the petitioner's representations as contained in Annexures 'B', 'D' and 'F to the writ application and noticed hereinabove, it would be evident that there has been a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng officer of the Customs Department. Ld. Counsel in this connection has relied upon in the cases reported in 1974 Dec. Cen-Cus 10C (SC) : ECR C Cus 855 SC : 1983 Excise Law Times, page 1486 and 1977 Criminal Law Journal, N.O.C. 67 and A.I.R. 1967 Calcutta, 78. 10. It was further submitted that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under the Customs Act itself as he has a right of appeal before the Commissioner of Appeals and then to Customs Excise Gold Control Tribunal and in some limited cases, the petitioner can also file an application under Article 136 of the Constitution of India before the Supreme Court. ld. Counsel in this connection relied on the cases . 11. Section 124 of the Customs Act reads thus: 124. Issue of Show ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or such a long time. 13. It is well settled by reason of various decisions of the Supreme Court of India that the applicability of the principles of natural justice may vary from case to case and in some case, by reason of a Statute, the principles of natural justice can be excluded. 14. However, as indicated hereinbefore Section 124 of the Customs Act itself provides for the extent of application of the principles of natural justice. 15. In Employees Union v. The Management of Bennet Colman and Co. reported in 1964 (8) F.L.R. page 720, a Ld. Single Judge of this Court while considering a matter of the second Departmental proceeding, held that while accepting the statement made by witnesses of the alleged incident, the enquiry offi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of India and Ors. reported in 1977 Cri. Law Journal N.O.C. 67, A.N. Sen, J. (as his Lordship then was) while considering a similar question under the Customs Act also held the principles of natural justice do not extend to the cross-examination of the witnesses. 18. Similarly in a case , a Divisional Bench comprising of P.B. Mukharji and S.A. Masood, JJ., while considering a matter under the Sea Customs Act also held that cross-examination of the witnesses is not comprehended under the said provision. The aforesaid decisions, therefore, in clear and unmistakable terms state that whereas a proceedee would be entitled to inspect the relevant documents, they would not be entitled to cross-examine any witness nor would they be entitled ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g to be used against the petitioner as the said documents are not in possession of the Department. 22. In the premises, aforementioned, I am of the view that although the petitioner deliberately did not inspect the other documents but keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and further in view of the fact that any penalty if imposed upon him may not only entail penal consequences, but thereby Departmental proceeding may also be initiated against him, I am of the view that before the petitioner is asked to file his written submissions, and be given an opportunity of being heard in the matter, he may be permitted to inspect all such documents which are already on records. 23. Such inspection must be made within a week....