TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (6) TMI 557
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....horai, Adv.. The Court : We have heard Mr. K.K. Maiti, learned counsel, assisted by Mr. Tapan Bhanja, learned advocate appearing for the appellant/revenue and Mr. Agnibesh Sengupta, learned counsel for the respondent in CUSTA/7/2022. These bunch of appeals can be divided into two categories. The first being MAT/556/2019 which was filed by the Department challenging the correctness of the order in WP 25447(w)/2018 dated 1st February, 2019. The said writ petition was filed by the respondent in MAT/556/2019 challenging an order-in-original dated September 6, 2018 passed by the adjudicating authority in exercise of its powers under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. By the said order, penalty has been imposed on the respondent in this ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rate orders had followed the order passed by the learned Writ Court in WP 25447(w)/2018 dated 1st February, 2019 and allowed the appeals and remanded the matters with the same direction as issued by the learned Writ Court. Aggrieved by the such orders, the revenue has preferred appeals under Section 130 of the Customs Act raising the following substantial questions of law. (i) Whether the Learned Tribunal has committed the gross error of law by not dealing with the appeal on merits and by not giving any independent reason thereto? (ii) Whether the Learned Tribunal's observation is correct as the Hon'ble High Court has set aside the impugned Order-in- Original dated 06.09.2018 in the case of Sampad Narayan Mukherjee is binding in the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re made by the learned standing counsel appearing for the revenue and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent in MAT/556/2019 and the other advocates appearing for the other respondents. The short question would be as to whether the adjudicating authority was right in refusing to grant an opportunity of cross-examination of third parties from whom statements have been recorded which have been referred to and relied upon in the adjudication order which was impugned in the writ petition as well as before the learned Tribunal. The adjudicating authority in the first paragraph of the order of adjudication dated 6th September, 2018 has opined that evidence in adjudication proceedings need not be like the one in the criminal case and fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er of adjudication that there are sufficient evidence available to justify the imposition of penalty on the noticees. It is true that the adjudicating authority has stated that this defence which is available corroborates the statement given by the third parties under Section 108 of the Act. Thus, if according to the adjudicating authority, there is enough evidence to pin down the respondent dehors the statements recorded under Section 108 of the Act, this Court fails to understands as to why the adjudicating authority should place reliance upon the statement under Section 108 of the Act. The learned counsel for the respondent in MAT/556/2019 submitted that in several of the decisions relied upon by the revenue they were cases where stateme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....able with the Department as mentioned in the order of adjudication. The respondents are directed to submit their reply within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the server copy of this order. On receipt of the reply, the adjudicating authority is directed to afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the authorised representative of the respondent and adjudicate the case afresh. We make it clear that while adjudicating the case afresh, the adjudicating authority shall not rely upon and refer to any of the statements which have been recorded under Section 108 of the Act from third parties in which the names of the respondents have been referred to and the adjudication shall be done based on the evidence which is stated to b....