2018 (5) TMI 1496 - AT - Central Excise

Clandestine removal - failure to discharge duty/reverse credit on clearance of 390M T of PP granules involving a total credit of ₹ 29,32,800/- - clearance of finished goods from the job worker premises, without being returned to the factory of the appellant - cross-examination of witnesses - Held that - we find from the order of the Ld. Commissioner that even though under the defence submission, he has recorded that appellants have requested cross examination of the witnesses, however, while denying the cross examination observed that on the scheduled date of hearing, the appellants had not requested cross examination - there is no merit in the said observation in denying the cross examination of the witnesses, whose statements have been relied upon in confirming the demand. The adjudicating authority is directed to allow cross examination of the witnesses - Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
- Denial of cross-examination of witnesses leading to violation of principles of natural justice.

Analysis:
The case involved appeals against an Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise, Daman, relating to the alleged clandestine clearance of PP Granules by the appellants without payment of duty. The appellants, engaged in manufacturing plastic products, were accused of failing to discharge duty on the clearance of raw materials and finished goods. The demand was confirmed with interest and penalties imposed. The appellant contended that the denial of cross-examination of witnesses, whose statements were relied upon by the adjudicating authority, violated the principles of natural justice. The Ld. Advocate for the appellant argued that the denial of cross-examination was unjustified and referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Andaman Timber Industries Ltd. vs. CCE, Kolkata-II (2015) to support the argument.

The Ld. Advocate highlighted that the denial of cross-examination of witnesses, including individuals from various companies, was a crucial aspect affecting the completeness of the defense. The Ld. AR for the Revenue accepted that the cross-examination of witnesses had not been allowed by the adjudicating authority. Upon hearing both sides and examining the records, the Tribunal found that the denial of cross-examination was unjustified. The Tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to allow cross-examination of the witnesses, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the principles of natural justice as established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in various cases, including Andaman Timber Industries Ltd's case. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed by way of remand, ensuring the right to cross-examination for the appellant to present a complete defense.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment focused on upholding the principles of natural justice by allowing the cross-examination of witnesses essential for a fair adjudication process. The case serves as a reminder of the importance of providing parties with the opportunity to challenge and question evidence presented against them, ensuring a just and transparent legal proceeding.