Back
J. B. PARDIWALA, K. V. VISWANATHAN
Additional Director General Adjudication, Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence – Appellant
Versus
Suresh Kumar And Co. Impex Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:
ORDER :
1. Permission for amendment of appeal(s) is granted.
2. These statutory appeals under Section 130E of the CUSTOMS ACT , 1962 (for short "the Act, 1962”) are at the instance of the Revenue and are directed against the judgment and order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short “the CESTAT”), New Delhi dated 17.04.2018, by which the appeals filed by the respondents-assessees herein came to be allowed and thereby the order in original dated 17.07.2017 passed by the Additional Director General (Adjudication), Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, New Delhi imposing penalty upon the respondents herein came to be set aside.
3. It appears from the materials on record that the respondents herein were engaged in the business of importing branded food items from various countries.
4. After the import of the branded food items, they were being sold in Delhi and Mumbai, respectively. Acting upon the information, the business as well as the residential premises of the respondents were raided, and an extensive search was undertaken by the officials of the department. In the course of various searches, the department was able to procure evidence which prima
Statements recorded during customs inquiries must comply with evidentiary procedures to be admissible; failure to follow such procedures renders them irrelevant.
The failure to follow statutory procedures for the admissibility of witness statements invalidates reliance on such statements, impacting penalties for mis-declaration.
Statements under section 108 of Customs Act inadmissible in adjudication without examining maker as witness, authority's opinion for admission in justice's interest, and cross-examination opportunity....
Mandatory procedures for the admissibility of statements in evidence under Customs Act must be followed; otherwise, reliance on such statements is invalid.
The court ruled that statements made under coercion cannot be admitted into evidence unless the procedural compliance of examination and cross-examination is satisfied.
Statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act cannot be relied upon unless the statutory procedure under Section 138B is strictly followed, ensuring fairness in evidence acceptance.
Statements under section 108 of the Customs Act must follow due process per section 138B to be admissible in adjudication; non-compliance renders them inadmissible.
Statements made under section 108 of the Customs Act require strict adherence to procedural safeguards for admissibility; failure to comply renders them non-evidential in adjudication.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
