2017 (5) TMI 386 - AT - Central Excise

Natural justice - Clandestine manufacture and clearance of goods - case of appellant is that even though they have requested for supply of the relied upon documents listed at Sr. No.14 to 17 of the list of documents annexed to the SCN, the same were not supplied to them - Held that - it is prudent to remand all these appeals to the Adjudicating Authority to decide the issues afresh against the aforesaid appellants after affording an opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses, namely, Shri Sushil Kumar Patodia and Shri Hari Prasad Agrawal and handing over the documents at Sr. No.14 to 17 of the list of the relied upon documents - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against OIO No.11/Commissioner/2007 dated 30/11/2007 for alleged clandestine manufacture and clearance of goods without duty payment. Request for supply of relied upon documents and cross-examination of witnesses. Allegation of non-supply of goods by one party to another for job work.

Analysis:
The appeals were filed against OIO No.11/Commissioner/2007 alleging clandestine manufacture and clearance of goods without duty payment. The demand of &8377; 35,72,951/- was confirmed on the appellants, along with penalties. The appellant requested supply of relied upon documents and cross-examination of witnesses, which were not provided, leading to a violation of natural justice principles. The advocate cited a Supreme Court decision to support the request for cross-examination. The advocate for another appellant argued against the illogicality of the allegation, stating that no notice was issued to another party involved in the transaction. The Revenue's representative did not object to remanding the matter for cross-examination of witnesses and document supply.

The Tribunal examined the requests for documents and cross-examination made by the appellants. It was noted that the requested documents were relied upon in issuing the demand notice and confirming the demand. Cross-examination of witnesses was deemed relevant as their statements were crucial in the impugned order. The penalty on one appellant for non-supply of goods was linked to the submissions of another appellant. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to remand all appeals to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh decision after allowing cross-examination of witnesses and providing the requested documents. All issues were kept open, and the appeals were allowed through remand.

The judgment highlighted the importance of procedural fairness, ensuring that appellants have access to relied upon documents and the opportunity for cross-examination. The decision to remand the case emphasized the need for a thorough examination of evidence and witness statements to reach a just conclusion. The Tribunal's ruling aimed to uphold the principles of natural justice and fair adjudication in the legal process, ensuring that all parties have a chance to present their case effectively.