2017 (8) TMI 255

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fficer of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) intercepted a truck loaded with containerized cargo entering the dock premises for export. On examination of the said cargo, the container was found to be stuffed with Red sanders wood concealed behind few stacks of empty corrugated carton boxes which was seized. A Show-cause notice dated 02.11.2009, was issued proposing confiscation of the goods and imposition of penalty on various persons. 2.1 Thereafter, on 21.11.2009, the DRI Officers intercepted a lorry coming out from a narrow lane beside Hooghly milk dairy (opp. Jora Hotel), which was moving along old Delhi Road towards Dankuni. On examination, it was found loaded with Red Sanders wood concealed under bags of onions. At the time of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....herein under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 amongst others. Hence, the appellants filed these appeals against the imposition of penalties. 3. The ld.Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants, submitted that the impugned orders were passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice in so far as the cross examination was not allowed. It is submitted that the penalties imposed on the appellants were on the basis of the statements of Shri Sanjit Das, who is absconding. It is also submitted that there is no iota of evidence of the involvement of the appellants. It is further submitted that the addendum to Show-cause dated 10.05.2011 of Show-cause notice dated 02.12.2009 is totally perverse. The ld.Counsel referred to various....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....last 4 to 5 years and he did not know their present address." I find from the adjudication order that the appellants appeared in personal hearing before the Adjudicating Authority and stated that they were not informed about the summon as they were residing at a different address and had no connection with the ancestral house. Apparently, I find that Sanjit Das had mentioned the address of the appellants, which is genuine. It is noted that the investigating agency attempted to interrogate the appellants, but failed to do so as they did not turn up in response to the summons. But it is not clear that when the appellants appeared in personal hearing, why the investigating officers were not given an opportunity to interrogate them. In my cons....