9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 306X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ating authority, when the persons known to appellant were explaining their role and appellant’s role in getting the licences by submitting forged documents it cannot be said the denial of cross-examination of co-noticees is violation of natural justice X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther evidence on records the adjudicating authority imposed penalty on the appellant and other co-noticees. The only contention of the appellant is that the opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses, whose statements were relied upon by the adjudicating authority was not granted. Hence, the impugned order is passed in violation to the principles of natural justice. The appellant relied upon the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the role of appellant in getting DEPB licence by submitting forge documents. It is also submitted that statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 is admissible as evidence as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in the case of Surjeet Singh Chhabra v. UOI as reported in 1997 (89) E.L.T. 646 and in the case of Naresh J. Sukhawani v. UOI as reported in 1996 (83) E.L.T. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t were explaining their role and appellant's role in getting the licences by submitting forged documents it cannot be said the denial of cross-examination of co-noticees is violation of natural justice. 6. In these circumstances as the appellant had not co-operated during the investigations or filed any reply to show cause notice has been filed or any reason has given by the appellants for s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
