1992 (3) TMI 248 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:

Violation of principles of natural justice in denial of cross-examination of witnesses leading to remand by the Tribunal.

Analysis:

The case involved an appeal by M/s. Kapri International Pvt. Ltd. against an Order passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Meerut. The appellants contended that there was a denial of principles of natural justice as they were not allowed to cross-examine the witnesses on which the Revenue had based its case. The Tribunal had remanded the matter previously for the same reason. The appellants argued that the denial of cross-examination violated natural justice, citing relevant legal precedents. The Departmental Representative, however, argued that there was no denial of natural justice as per the observations made by the Collector in the Order-in-Original.

Upon hearing both sides and reviewing the facts, the Tribunal found that the earlier order by the Collector had been vitiated due to a lack of proper hearing and violation of natural justice. The Tribunal waived the pre-deposit condition and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication by the Collector in accordance with the law and principles of natural justice. Despite the subsequent issuance of summons for cross-examination, no witnesses appeared, leading the Tribunal to conclude that the appellants' plea for cross-examination was merely a delay tactic. The Tribunal held that the appellants had been given adequate opportunities to present their defense and that natural justice had been fully complied with.

The Tribunal referred to a similar case where the Adjudicating authority failed to provide an effective opportunity for cross-examination of third parties, leading to the penalty being set aside. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of allowing the appellant to challenge statements through cross-examination and held that non-availability of witnesses should not be a ground for penalization when cross-examination rights are denied. Citing legal precedents, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Collector for re-adjudication within a specified timeframe, with a directive to observe natural justice principles and grant a personal hearing.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found in favor of the appellants, setting aside the impugned order and remanding the matter for re-adjudication by the Collector while emphasizing the importance of upholding principles of natural justice and granting cross-examination rights to the appellants. The appeal was allowed by way of remand, ensuring a fair process in accordance with legal principles.