2022 (8) TMI 1259

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Nagendra Yadav, Authorized Representative for the Department Shri Devesh Tripathi and Shri Faraz Aneez, Advocates for the Respondent ORDER The Commissioner of Customs ICD [the Commissioner] has filed this appeal for quashing the order dated 30.05.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) [the Commissioner (Appeals)], by which the order dated 03.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ort documents. 3. A show cause notice dated 19.09.2015 was issued to M/s. Saay Exim Pvt. Ltd. and 21 others noticees but the two respondents in this appeal were not issued the show cause notice. However, a corrigendum dated 02.02.2016 was issued to the aforesaid show cause notice wherein the names of the two respondents were included for service of the show cause notice. 4. During the adjudi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....2018 that the two respondents filed appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals). 7. The Commissioner (Appeals) found as the fact that the corrigendum alone was served upon the two respondents and it was during the personal hearing that the show cause notice was served upon the two respondents, but it did not contain allegations against the respondents. 8. The Commissioner (Appeals), according....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to point out anything to contradict the finding recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) that even otherwise the show cause notice does not contain any allegation against the respondents. Learned authorised representative, however, stated that the corrigendum did include the names of the two respondents for service of the show cause notice. 11. Shri Devesh Tripathi, learned counsel for the two r....