TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1684
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, assailing the order dated 7th May 2019 passed by the Respondent (hereinafter, 'impugned order') as also the Show Cause Notice dated 5th July, 2018 issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (hereinafter, 'DRI') (hereinafter, 'impugned SCN'). 3. The simple issue involved is whether the Petitioner is entitled to seek cross-examination of persons who have given certain statements, and also of officials of the Customs Department. 4. A brief background of the present case is that, the impugned SCN was issued to the Petitioner on 5th July, 2018 as per which large scale evasion of Customs Duty, by way of diversion of good....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e scale evasion of Customs Duty. 9. The Petitioner had sought cross-examination of certain individuals in these proceedings, which was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority vide the impugned order dated 7th May, 2019. 10. The persons whose cross-examination was sought by the Petitioner in these proceedings are as under: ● Sh. Lalit Dogra ● Sh. Raja Bansal ● Sh. Sanjay Gahlot ● Sh. Divakant Jha ● Sh. Rajat Prabhakar ● Sh. Pankaj Verma, Inspector, Bond Section ● Sh. Devender Singh, Tax Assistant ● Sh. Kishan Lal, Senior Tax Assistant, Bond Section ● Sh. Pramod Kumar, Superintendent Audit Branch ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it Dogra deliberately aided and abetted the said scheme of duty evasion by way of diverting the warehoused goods into the Domestic Tariff Area without payment of duty and therefore, it appears that Sh. Lalit Dogra has rendered himself to penal action under Section 112 (a), 112 (b) and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 for the acts of omissions and commissions as discussed herein." xxx 42.6 Role of Sh. Sanjay Gahlot:-Sh. Sanjay Gahlot worked on the directions of Sh. Sanjeev Maggu and ignored to fulfill his duties as a Warehouse Keeper of the Public Bonded Warehouse, as laid down in the Warehousing Rules and Regulations. Sh. Sanjay Gahlot, in his statements, accepted that the goods were removed from their premises without payme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., Superintendent, Audit Branch, Mr. Puneet Sethi, Air Customs Officer, Ms. Geeta Juneja, Superintendent, Mr. Mahindra Kapoor, Superintendent, Mr. Kulwendra Singh, Assistant Commissioner. 16. The aforesaid persons being Customs Officials, this Court is of the considered view that they were discharging their duties in an official capacity. Consequently, they cannot, as a matter of right, be subjected to cross-examination, particularly in view of the settled position of law laid down by this Court in W.P.(C) 4576/2026 titled M/s Vallabh Textiles vs. Additional Commissioner Central Tax GST, Delhi East and Ors., wherein the Court has held that the right to cross examination is not an unfettered and absolute right. Prejudice has to be shown wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....atements are recorded. It could be permitted by the Authority in case of some persons and not all." 17. Insofar as Mr. Divakant Jha and Mr. Rajat Prabhakar are concerned, they are the Customs Brokers and proprietors of M/s D.S. Cargo Agency and M/s R.P. Cargo Handling Services. Considering that they could be independent Customs Brokers, who also serve other clients, their cross-examination is permitted. 18. Insofar as Mr. Rohit Chaudhary and Mr. Rajesh Mehta are concerned, they are staff members of Customs Bonded Warehouses, being private individuals, their cross-examination is permitted. 19. Accordingly, the impugned order is modified. 20. Let the cross-examination of aforementioned four individuals Mr. Divakant Jha and Mr. Raj....