1996 (10) TMI 304 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Entitlement to benefit of Notification No. 48/89.
2. Determination of whether 75% bagasse was used in the production of paper.
3. Violation of principles of natural justice.
4. Failure to verify quantity of bagasse purchased by the appellant.
5. Reliance on dismissed employee's statement without opportunity for cross-examination.
6. Inadequate reasons to discard chemical examiner's test report.
7. Lack of investigation by the department regarding bagasse purchases by the appellant.
8. Consideration of factory letters regarding bagasse usage.
9. Necessity for cross-examination and verification of chemical examiner's report.
10. Failure to investigate appellant's claims regarding bagasse purchases.

Analysis:

The case involves the question of whether the appellant is entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 48/89, which requires the use of 75% bagasse in the production of paper. The appellant argued that the impugned order was based on statements without proper verification. The chemical examiner's report confirmed the presence of bagasse in the paper, but the percentage was not specified. The appellant contended that the department should have verified the quantity of bagasse purchased to determine the actual percentage used. The failure to investigate this aspect was deemed a violation of natural justice.

The appellant also raised concerns about reliance on a dismissed employee's statement regarding the inability to determine bagasse percentage. The appellant requested cross-examination of this individual, which was denied. The appellant argued that the department should have relied on the chemical examiner's test report instead of employee statements. The lack of proper investigation into the quantity of bagasse purchased further highlighted procedural flaws in the adjudication process.

The tribunal noted that the department should have tested the veracity of the statements made by the appellant regarding bagasse purchases and usage. The failure to conduct a thorough investigation based on the appellant's submissions led to a violation of natural justice. The tribunal emphasized the importance of cross-examination and proper verification of evidence to ensure a fair adjudication process.

In conclusion, the tribunal allowed the appeals for a de novo adjudication, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive review of the evidence, including the verification of bagasse purchases and usage. The tribunal highlighted the importance of following principles of natural justice and conducting thorough investigations to reach a fair and just decision.