Bombay High Court
Mohammed Altaf vs Commissioner Of Customs (Ns-Gen) on 14 August, 2024
Author: K.R. Shriram
Bench: K.R. Shriram
Digitally
signed by
GAURI GAURI AMIT
GAEKWAD
AMIT Date:
1/2 919.CUAPP-30-2022.doc
GAEKWAD 2024.08.16
10:36:07
+0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
CUSTOMS APPEAL NO.30 OF 2022
Mohammad Altaf ....Appellant
V/s.
Commissioner of Customs & Ors. ....Respondents
----
Mr. Anil Balani a/w. Ms. Priyasha Pawar i/b. PDS Legal for appellant.
Mr. Karan Adik a/w. Mr. Abhishek R. Mishra for respondents.
----
CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM &
JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
DATED : 14th AUGUST 2024 P.C. :
1 Heard.
2 Appeal admitted on the following five substantial questions of law :
QUESTIONS OF LAW A) Was the learned CESTAT correct in upholding an ex-parte adjudication order, passed without giving a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing and granting cross examination of persons whose uncorroborated statements were relied upon ignoring their retractions?
B) Could penalty be imposed on Appellant by Custom Authorities when the CBI had given a clean chit to Appellant in the very same case based on the very same facts and evidence?
C) Whether non filing of chargesheet by the CBI would ipso facto vitiate the proceedings under the Customs Act, 1962?
Gauri Gaekwad ::: Uploaded on - 16/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 23/08/2024 13:51:20 ::: 2/2 919.CUAPP-30-2022.doc D) Whether the first respondent authority and the Tribunal is correct in holding that the charges of Section 114 of Customs Act, 1962 is made out in the facts and circumstances of the case against Appellant, warranting imposition of penalty?
E) Can call data records and electronic evidence, which are neither authenticated nor issued or certified by the service provider, be relied upon without confirming ownership/possession of such devices ignoring the provisions of Section 138C of the Customs Act, 1962?
3 Mr. Adik, counsel for respondents waives service.
4 The Registrar (Judicial)/Registrar, High Court, Original Side, Bombay to ensure that the original record in relation to this appeal is summoned from the Tribunal and offered for inspection of the parties. This paper book is treated sufficient for the purpose of admission of this appeal.
However, the Registry must further ensure preparation of complete paper book in accordance with the rules. The registry in the first instance must send intimation of admission of this appeal enclosing therewith a copy of this order so as to enable the Tribunal to act accordingly.
5 Appeal be listed for final hearing on 27th September 2024.
(JITENDRA JAIN, J.) (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.) Gauri Gaekwad ::: Uploaded on - 16/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 23/08/2024 13:51:20 :::