1999 (8) TMI 628

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Advocate submits that there is no factual basis to the duty demand. He has also submitted that the adjudication proceedings were conducted in violation of the principles of natural justice. Shri Jain points out that most of the duty demand (over Rs. 40 lakhs) is on account of the dispute regarding clandestine manufacture and clearance of high carbon chrome ingots in the guise of other alloy steel ingots by the appellants. Shri Jain submits that there is no basis at all to this allegation as the appellants did not have the capacity to manufacture high carbon chrome. He points out that the appellants did not have the requisite machinery for the manufacture of ferro chrome machinery and that they had submitted before the adjudicating authorit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ort mentions only one sample. He, therefore, submits that it is necessary to retest and to give finding on each of the samples. Shri Jain also submits that there was no justification for not allowing the cross-examination of the Chemical Examiner who tested the sample. Yet another grievance of the appellants is that the Department has not released the unrelied documents to the appellants. Shri Jain submits that as the records are not being relied upon by the Department, they should have returned to their original owner. Further, the appellants need to scrutinise these documents so as to ascertain what value they have for the purpose of explaining their case. He submits that the Commissioner has denied return of the documents saying that he .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e they are not required for the proceedings. We, therefore, order that the adjudicating authority should release all the unrelied upon documents to the appellants immediately so that the appellants can examine them and utilise them for their defence. The appellants grievance relating to retest of the sample and cross-examination of the Chemical Examiner is also justified. Five samples were drawn from the appellants, but the report speaks only of the sample . This creates doubts as to whether all the samples were tested and what was the result of that test. Therefore, there is requirement to retest the samples. We are also not able to appreciate why the Chemical Examiner was not offered for cross-examination so that the appellants could se .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X