2020 (9) TMI 855

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e for the Appellant Shri S. Guha, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER P.K. Choudhary : The Appellant is engaged in the business of trading in glass products. In the present case, the Appellant had sold the consignment bearing Bill of Entry No. 418530 dated 07th July 2008 filed by M/s Trade Development Combine to the said importer on High seas. Departmental officers inspe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....peal, the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal of the Appellant. Hence, the present appeal before this Tribunal. 2. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 3. I find that it is the case of the Department that the declared value of the consignment in question was much lower than the contemporaneous imports. On the basis of the statement of the CHA, the Department concluded that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nity of cross-examination constituted gross violation of their rights. However, it is the Department's contention that the Appellant failed to appear on the schedule date of personal hearing and therefore, the Appellant was prevented from cross-examining the CHA. Further, the Department has contended that the CHA has stated that the amount of Customs duty payable for the said consignment was gi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... had made the request for providing cross-examination at the adjudication stage. I find that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Manek Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India [2016 (334) ELT 302 (Guj.)] has held that cross-examination is an integral part of the Principles of Natural Justice. Therefore, by denying an opportunity of cross-examination to the Appellant, the Adjudicating Authority has a....