2020 (11) TMI 433 - AT - Central Excise

Cross-examination of witnesses denied - violation of principle of natural justice - Section 129A (i) of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT - To the earlier proceedings when the matter was remanded vide order dated 19.09.2014, this Tribunal has directed the adjudicating authority to consider the plea for cross examination of deponents by the adjudicating authority. By going through the impugned order, the cross examination of the persons has been rejected without assigning any reasons, therefore, the arguments made by the Ld. AR are futile as the impugned order for rejection of cross examination is not a speaking order. The way of working of the adjudicating authority cannot be appreciated in these terms - There are no merit in rejecting the request of cross examination without assigning any reasons. The adjudicating authority is directed to consider the request of the appellant for cross examination of the persons and personal hearing be granted for the said request pass a speaking order whether cross examination can be granted or not - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Cross examination of witnesses
2. Maintainability of appeal against the impugned order

Cross examination of witnesses:
The appellant appealed against an order denying cross examination of certain witnesses crucial to the case. The appellant argued that the denial violated the principle of natural justice and referenced relevant case laws to support the necessity of cross examination. The adjudicating authority had previously been directed by the Tribunal to consider the plea for cross examination. The Tribunal found the impugned order lacking in reasons for rejecting the cross examination, deeming it not a speaking order. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order and directed the adjudicating authority to reconsider the request for cross examination without imposing conditions on providing questions in advance.

Maintainability of appeal against the impugned order:
The Authorized Representative raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the appeal, contending that the order was not final and the adjudication was still pending. However, the Tribunal held that the appeal was maintainable under Section 129A (i) of the Customs Act, 1962, as it allowed appeals against decisions or orders by the adjudicating authority. The Tribunal rejected the preliminary objection, emphasizing that the intimation by the Superintendent adjudication represented the adjudicating authority.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the adjudicating authority to reconsider the request for cross examination of witnesses without imposing conditions and emphasized the importance of providing a speaking order.