TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 886
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....10/01/2019 for the clearance of seven items which include GI wire dia 0.56mm 25kg/roll, 2Mts among other six items. The disputed goods were self assessed under declared CHT 72172020. The goods imported under the two Bills of Entry were examined by the proper officer at CFS who reported that BIS is applicable on GI wire imported. As per S.O.3966(E) dt. 13/08/2018 issued by Ministry of Steel, 'Mild Steel wire for general engineering purposes' is covered under IS 280:2006 w.e.f. 18/12/2018. Since the importer has not produced the BIS certificate for the item, the goods appeared to be in violation of Foreign Trade Policy rendering the goods liable for confiscation under Customs Act, 1962. The adjudicating authority on completion of the required procedure, confiscated the goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 and imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,50,000/- on the importer under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 vide the Order-in-Original dt. 29/05/2019. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals) who rejected the same. 3. Heard both sides and perused records. 4.1. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....notice were not furnished with the show-cause notice. Thereafter the appellant vide letter dt. 29/05/2019 requested to issue copies and sought a week time for personal hearing. Appellant also requested to extend an opportunity for cross-examination of the examining officer who conducted the preliminary examination of the goods, examiner who conducted the lab test in Cochin Customs House but without considering the said request, considering the appearance of co-noticee in show-cause notice as on behalf of the appellant, Order-in-Original was passed. He also submitted that there is no reasonable opportunity extended to the appellant for personal hearing and therefore the impugned order is illegal and unsustainable. He also submitted that the law is well settled that documents not supplied with show-cause notice cannot be relied in any further proceedings. In support of this, he relied upon the decision in the case of Kellogg India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. UOI [2006(193) ELT 385 (Bom.0] wherein the Bombay High Court has held as under;- 43.The rules of natural justice are the minimum standards of fair decision-making imposed on persons or bodies acting in a judicial or quasi-judicial cap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ese functions in a fair and just manner. Thus non-supply of documents, not extending opportunity for cross-examination and not providing even one day time for submitting reply to show-cause notice before personal hearing etc are patent irregularity in any adjudication proceedings, violation of principles of natural justice results in arbitrariness and for this reason the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 4.3. the other submission of the learned counsel is that appellant made declaration of the goods as GI Wire and there is no admissible evidence to allege that goods imported by the appellant is falling under the category of mild steel as alleged. In fact the appellant made declaration of the goods as Galvanised Iron Wire of 0.7mm under HSN code 72172020 as evident from the Bill of Entry as per invoice and there is no allegation regarding the mis-declaration of any such particulars. Thus there is no reason or admissible evidence to allege that goods imported by the appellant is falling under the category of mild steel or otherwise to bring it under the ambit of Notification issued vide S.O. 3966(E) dt. 13/08/2018 and to demand BIS certificate as per IS 280:2006. He also s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e sides and perusal of the material on record, I find that both the authorities have completely failed to follow the principles of natural justice in passing the orders. The original authority issued the show-cause notice in a hurry on 28/05/2019 and the same was served on the appellant at 5pm on the same day and the appellant was directed to file reply next day before 10 to 12AM and further the copies of the relied upon documents in show-cause notice were not furnished with the show-cause notice and when the appellant filed its letter dt. 29/05/2019 requesting the original authority to issue the copies and sought a week's time for personal hearing and to reply to the show-cause notice, the same was not considered and no personal hearing was granted and original order was passed confiscating the goods and imposition of penalty. The entire procedure followed by the original authority appears to be in gross violation of the principle of natural justice. It is pertinent to mention that the appellants have been importing the same goods for the last so many years and no objection was raised regarding the classification of the imported goods. Further when the goods were not released for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Customs Act. 7. In view of my discussion above, I am of the considered view that the impugned order is totally illegal and has been passed arbitrarily without following the basic principles of natural justice and on merit also, the appellant is covered by the transition provision as covered under FTP. In view of this, I hold that the impugned order is not sustainable in law and therefore I set aside the same and direct the original authority to immediately release the goods on payment of appropriate duty. Thus the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any. 8. Before parting with the judgment, I am constrained to observe that in the present case even the goods which admittedly did not require BIS certificate were illegally detained and was only released when the appellant filed a Writ Petition in the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala. The high handedness of the adjudicating authority, is writ large when he failed to conclude the proceedings within the time stipulated by the Hon'ble High Court in their order dt. 10/04/2019. Further the appellant was also compelled to initiate contempt of court proceedings before the Hon'ble High Court and in order to save himself from th....