ORDER
K.K. Bhatia, Member (T)
1. The Commissioner of Customs, ICD, Thughlakabad, New Delhi vide his Order-in-Orginal dt. 13.11.2000 has confirmed a duty of Rs.3.50,250/- along with interest on this amount 2 24% P.A. The Commissioner in his order has further imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on the appellants under Section 112 of the Customs act, 1962.
2. The present appeal and the Stay Petition are filed against the above order of the Commissioner. Shri V.R. Sethi, Advocate appearing for the appellants refers to that apart of the order, in which, it is stated that the importer was issued a show cause notice dt. 8.8.2000 to show cause why a sum of Rs.4,62,250/- should not be recovered with the interest @ 24% P.A. from the date of import of goods and who a penalty should not be imposed on them. In that order, it is also stated that the personal hearing was fixed on 11 & 18.9.2000 at 03.00 P.M. However, the importer filed to appear.Consequently, the Commissioner has observed in his order that he has no alternative but to decide the matter on the basis of record available with the Department. The ld. Advocate submits that the said show cause notice dt. 8.8.2000 was received by the party on 16.10.2000, to which the reply was immediately sent on 18.10.2000. It is stated that since the order is passed on 13.11.2000,
notwithstanding the non-representation of the appellants for personal hearing before the Commissioner, the contents of the written reply should have been taken into consideration before passing the order by the Adjudicating Authority. It is further contended that the party could not be present for personal hearing fixed by the Commissioner since, the dates of personal hearing were mentioned in the show cause notice itself which was
received by them only on 16.10.2000. in support of this contention, the ld. advocate for the appellants has produced the cover under which the show cause notice is stated to have been received by the appellants. The cover bears the postal date stamp dt. 14.10.2000. In view of these facts, it is contended that the order is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and therefore, it is requested that the matter may be remand for re-consideration and passing de-novo order after taking into account the submission made by the appellants.
3. Shri A.K. Jain, JDR for the respondents has no objection to this course of action to be adopted.
4. I have considered the submission made before me. As already stated, the Order-in-Appeal is passed ex-parte on the ground that the noticee party neither responded to the show cause notice issued to them nor did they attend the personal hearing on the dates fixed for the same. The appellants are contending that the impugned show cause notice dt. 8.8.2000 was received by them only on 16.10.2000 to which the reply was immediately sent on 18.10.2000. The appellants have produced a copy of their reply dt. 18.10.2000 which bears the stamps of the Office of the Commissioner, ICD, Tuglakabad dt. 18.10.2000. This supports the content in of the appellants that the written reply to the show cause notice was duly submitted to the Office of the
Commissioner which admittedly has not been taken into consideration while passing the order in this matter. Keeping these facts in view, it is felt that the order is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and the matter calls for reconsideration. Accordingly, the appellants are allowed the waiver of the pre-deposit of duty and penalty imposed on them and the matter is taken up for final disposal. The order passed by the Commissioner of Customs is set aside and the matter is remanded to him for passing a de-novo order on taking into account the reply submitted by the appellants. They shall also be afforded a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing before taking the final view in the matter.
5. The appeal is thus allowed be way remand in the above terms.
(Announced and dictated in the Court).