2019 (1) TMI 1956 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - non-receipt of inputs - cenvat credit availed without receipt of inputs - entire case is mainly based on various statements and other evidences - HELD THAT - The entire case is mainly based on various evidences including the statement of various persons. On the request of the appellant, some of the witnesses were cross examined, however, majority of witnesses were not cross examined. In such situation, the adjudication of the SCN without cross examination does not appear to be proper. Therefore, matter needs to be re-considered as a whole after conducting the cross examination of all witnesses. Needless to say that the commissioner is not prevented from adjudicating the SCN on the basis of cross examination of whichever witnesses appear for cross examination and on the basis of other evidences on record. The matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority for passing afresh order after allowing the cross examination of all the witnesses. The appellant shall be given sufficient opportunity of personal hearing and making their submission after cross examination - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Availment of cenvat credit without receipt of inputs; Cross examination of witnesses; Sustainability of adjudication based on statements not cross examined.

Analysis:
The case revolves around the allegation that M/s Taha Wires Pvt. Ltd availed cenvat credit without receiving inputs, leading to a confirmed demand for the credit on non-receipt of inputs. The appellant's counsel argued that the case heavily relies on statements and other evidence, emphasizing the importance of cross examining all witnesses. The appellant requested a remand for a fresh order after cross examining all witnesses to ensure a fair adjudication process.

The Deputy Commissioner representing the Revenue reiterated the findings of the impugned order, standing by the initial decision. However, the Tribunal, after considering both sides' submissions and reviewing the records, noted that the case primarily hinges on various pieces of evidence, including witness statements. While some witnesses were cross examined at the appellant's request, a significant number were not. This raised concerns about the propriety of adjudicating the show cause notice without full cross examination of all witnesses.

Consequently, the Tribunal deemed it necessary to re-examine the matter comprehensively by allowing the cross examination of all witnesses. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision. The adjudicating authority was instructed to conduct cross examination of all witnesses, provide the appellant with ample opportunity for personal hearing, and allow them to make submissions post cross examination. This approach aimed to ensure a fair and thorough assessment of the case based on all available evidence and witness testimonies.