9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (2) TMI 167X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plication and pleaded that though 864 witnesses have been mentioned in the order, actually 110 persons were relied upon by the Department. He pleaded that the Tribunal may modify its order by substituting the figure 110 against the figure of 864. Shri Bhagat also pleaded that the Member (Technical) Shri P.C. Jain to whom the point of difference was referred in para 8 of the order has mentioned that "Having gone through the entire evidence on record, I am of the view that a serious prejudice is likely to be caused to the appellants if they are not given the opportunity to cross-examine the statements of persons on whom the Department relies. Accordingly I agree with the learned Judicial Member and consider that the case is fit for remand as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... parties and the cross examination of others was waived), principles of natural justice have been complied with and the plea of the party is not tenable". Shri Sridharan pleaded that a perusal of para 33.7 shows that Collector had mentioned 864 witnesses in the said para and on the basis of that the Tribunal had passed the order. There is no whisper of 110 witnesses either in the show cause notice or in the order or in the arguments advanced by the Revenue before the Tribunal and as such the application for Rectification of Mistake needs to be dismissed. He further stated that the judgments cited by the learned DR are on principles of natural justice and not relevant to the present application. In support of his arguments, he cited a decisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C. Jain :- "(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case there was violation of the principles of natural justice. (2) If so, whether the order of the Judicial Member remanding the case for fresh disposal after complying with the principles of natural justice is in order" The 3rd Member, Shri P.C. Jain after hearing both the sides had passed an order and para No. 8 from the said judgment is reproduced below :- "8. Having gone through the entire evidence on record, I am of the view that a serious prejudice is likely to be caused to the appellants if they are not given the opportunity to cross-examine the statements of persons on whom the department relies. Accordingly, I agree with the learned Judicial Member an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es and after having looked into the facts of the case had come to the conclusion and ordered for cross- examination of 864 witnesses. The learned D.R. in his arguments had referred to the judgment given by the 3rd Member where Shri P.C. Jain Member (Technical) mentioned that "I am of the view that a serious prejudice is likely to be caused to the appellants if they are not given the opportunity to cross-examine the statements of persons on whom the department relies. Accordingly, I agree with the learned Judicial Member and consider that the case is fit for remand as ordered by him". We would like to observe that it is not open to the parties to read an order in piece-meal manner and enter into a controversy. In fact, we would like to obser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
