Debangsu Basak, J. - (1.) An order-in-original dated June 20, 2017 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Central Adjudication Cell (Port), Customs House, Kolkata is under challenge in the present writ petition.
(2.) Learned advocate for the petitioners submit that although the impugned order is appealable the writ petition is maintainable inasmuch as the adjudicating authority has acted in excess of jurisdiction in awarding penalty beyond the provisions of Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. The impugned order does not give any reason as to why penalty under Section 114A has been imposed. The adjudicating authority is guilty of acting in breach of the principles of natural justice. Documents referred to in the impugned order in original were not made over to the petitioner. The petitioner became aware of such documents for the first time after perusing the order in original. Consequently, the impugned order should be interfered with.
(3.) Learned advocate for the revenue submits that, the petitioner did not ask for the documents in course of the adjudicating process. The petitioners had filed a written submission in the proceeding. So far as imposition of penalty under Sections 114 and 114AA is concerned, the learned advocate for the revenue submits that, there are sufficient reasons given in the impugned order in original adjudicating the same.;