9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 1132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of some goods which were duly reflected in their balance sheets - Revenue recorded the statement of five persons and as per the statements the goods were not manufactured on job-work basis however the same were manufactured as hired labourer. The Appellants asked for cross-examination of the witnesses whose statements were relied upon by the adjudicating authority and the same has been denied – Held that:- order passed without affording an opportunity of cross-examination is violation to the principles of natural justice, Appeals are disposed of by way of remand - E/167-169/09 - - - Dated:- 26-4-2011 - SHRI S.S. KANG, SHRI P.R.CHANDRASEKHARAN, JJ. Appearance: Shri Arijit Chakraborty, Advocate and Shri N.K.Chowdhury, Advocate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... five responded to the summons issued by the Revenue. The statements of the five job-workers were recorded and as per the Revenue the statements were to the effect that they got only labour charges as they have undertaken the job as hired labour. The contention is that these statements were taken into consideration while confirming the demand by the adjudicating authority and the request for cross-examination was declined. As the statements were relied upon by the Revenue against the Appellants therefore denial of opportunity of cross-examination is violation of principles of natural justice. 5. It is also submitted that in respect of claim of the Appellants regarding trading activity, the contention was rejected by the adjudicating auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion the Revenue recorded the statement of five persons and as per the statements the goods were not manufactured on job-work basis however the same were manufactured as hired labourer. The Appellants asked for cross-examination of the witnesses whose statements were relied upon by the adjudicating authority and the same has been denied. As the Revenue is relying upon the statements which were recorded at the back of the Appellants hence Appellants are entitled for cross-examination. Hence the impugned order passed without affording an opportunity of cross-examination is violation to the principles of natural justice. Further we find that Appellants produced some evidences to show that Appellants were also trading in the same or similar good ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
