2019 (4) TMI 1148 - AT - Central Excise

Clandestine removal - order was passed ex-parte - cross-examination of various witnesses denied - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - In the present case, the appellant is situated under jurisdiction of Nagpur Commissionerate. The order confirming the demand against M/s Kamdhenu Ispat Ltd. was challenged before the Delhi Bench of this Tribunal and after considering all aspects of the case the Tribunal remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for de novo consideration of all issues raised by M/s Kamdhenu Ispat Ltd. Since the investigation was common and M/s Kamdhenu Ispat Ltd. is also a noticee in the present case, therefore, the present case also be remanded to the adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication taking all issues raised by the appellant in the present appeals - Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
- Allegation of duty evasion
- Violation of principles of natural justice
- Cross-examination of witnesses
- Remand of the case for fresh adjudication

Analysis:
1. Allegation of Duty Evasion:
The case involved an appeal against an Order-in-Original alleging evasion of duty in the manufacture and clearance of certain goods. The appellant was accused of evading duty during a specific period, and a show-cause notice was issued proposing recovery of the unpaid duty along with interest and penalty. After adjudication, the demand was confirmed with interest and penalty, leading to the filing of the present appeal.

2. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The appellant contended that a common investigation had been initiated by the Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence (DGCEI) against multiple parties, including the appellant. The appellant argued that relevant documents were not provided, violating the principles of natural justice. The appellant also highlighted that the order was passed ex-parte without providing effective hearing and disallowing cross-examination of witnesses. This raised concerns regarding procedural fairness and adherence to principles of natural justice.

3. Cross-Examination of Witnesses:
The appellant requested cross-examination of various witnesses, which was disallowed during the adjudication process. The denial of this opportunity for cross-examination could impact the appellant's ability to present a robust defense and challenge the evidence against them. The issue of cross-examination was crucial for ensuring a fair and transparent adjudication process.

4. Remand of the Case for Fresh Adjudication:
The Tribunal acknowledged that a common investigation had been initiated by the DGCEI against the appellant and other parties. Considering that a similar case involving M/s Kamdhenu Ispat Ltd. had been remanded by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal for fresh adjudication, the Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument for remanding the present case as well. The Tribunal decided to allow the appeals by remanding the case to the adjudicating authority for a fresh consideration of all issues raised by the appellant, including the supply of documents and the opportunity for cross-examination.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeals by remanding the case to the adjudicating authority, emphasizing the importance of procedural fairness, cross-examination of witnesses, and the need for a comprehensive reevaluation of the issues raised by the appellant in light of the common investigation involving multiple parties.