9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (7) TMI 696X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s been imposed on M/s. S.P.S. Metal Cast Alloys (P) Ltd. 2. Arguing on the applications, Shri B.N. Chattopadhyay, learned Consultant for the first two applicants, submits that M/s. Arch Steel Traders (P) Ltd. is an unregistered dealer. They procured the ingots from M/s. Dina Metal Ltd. under the cover of invoice as well as challan. The goods were then sent under their own invoice to M/s. Bengal Rolling Mills (B.R.M.L. in short) at the instance of M/s. Siva Industries. In the said challan issued by M/s. Arch Steel Traders, reference to the invoices of M/s. Dina Metals was given. He submits that the said trucks were found by the Central Excise Officers in the premises of B.R.M.L., who recorded the statements of the drivers. In the said st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch as the entire case of the Department was based upon the statements of the drivers, it was the duty of the Department to supply copies of the said statements to the appellants. 3. Shri S.K. Roychowdhury, learned Advocate, for the applicant/appellant firm, M/s. S.P.S. Metal Cast Alloys (P) Ltd., submits that one of the trucks was sent by them to B.R.M.L. under the cover of invoice. As the invoice was with the employee of the transport company, Shri Sudhir Pandit who was not in the truck at the relevant point of time, copies could not be produced immediately; but was produced subsequently as is the admitted facts. In these circumstances, the adjudicating authority was not justified in discarding the said invoice. 4. Countering the ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Advocates. The Commissioner while rejecting the prayer of the applicants/appellants has made the following observations :- Regarding the pleas of M/s. Dina Metal Ltd. and Arch Steel Traders (P) Ltd. that they were not given copies of the statements of the drivers on which the subject notice has relied upon. I find that the contents of the statements have been elaborately included in the notice itself, and nothing has been suppressed. In the reply to the notice the noticees have refuted the charges based on the statements and it cannot be said they were denied any opportunity to defend themselves on this score. Moreover, they had ampple time to obtain copies of the statements if they so desired before or after submission of their writt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellants to rebut the allegations made against them and to take a proper defence. Further, the observation of the Commissioner that there is no chance of any fresh evidence coming up for cross-examination of the drivers, is a statement made on the basis of assumption. It is for the appellants to take a chance for bringing out the evidence or to test the veracity or the correctness of the statements on cross-examination and the adjudicating authority should not have stepped in the shoes of the appellants and observed that there was no chance of any fresh evidence. As such, we do not feel that the reasons for rejecting the cross-examination of the drivers are legal. 6.1. In view of the foregoing, we are convinced that the impugned Order has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
