9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 199X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der-in-Original No. 14/Commissioner/CE/KOL-V/ADJN/2011 dated-29/03/2011. Under this Order-in-Original dated 29/3/2011 a demand of Rs. 4,27,05,196/- has been confirmed against the main appellant M/s. A.P. Electricals Pvt. Ltd. alongwith interest and equivalent penalty. Others Shri Akhilesh Kotia, Director, Smt. Charu Kotia, Director and Shri Raju Das, Works Manager of the main appellant have filed appeals regarding penalties imposed upon them. 2. Shri B.N. Chattopadhyay, Consultant appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that main appellant had a registered factory premises which was visited by the officers of Central Excise on 16/10/2008. That during the course of verification, no machinery/raw material for the manufacture of transform ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ings.It appears that the Tribunal has picked those portion of the statements which may lead to presumption against the petitioners; without referring and/or recording sequel of statements which, if read as a whole, would have resulted in another opinion and/or finding. Furthermore, there is no recording of the reasons by the Tribunal either for imposition of 25% of the duty or waiver of 75% thereof. The Tribunal must record such findings and in absence of proper reasons this order cannot stand. This Court, therefore, quash and set aside the impugned order. The matter is remitted to the Tribunal, which shall decide the said application afresh after recording respective submissions and the reasons for disposal thereof in accordance with law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re proposed to be confirmed only on the basis of few statements, it is incumbent upon the adjudicating authority to extend cross examination of the relied upon witnesses before deciding the issue. In the present proceedings, appellants sought for the cross examination of the Works Manager and the job workers which was turned down. In the interest of justice, we are of the opinion that adjudicating authority should make effort in granting cross-examination of the relied upon witnesses and, thereafter pass a reasoned order in this case. Accordingly, we set aside the Order-in-Original dated 29/3/2011 and remand the case to the adjudicating authority for de novo consideration after allowing the cross-examination of the witnesses which appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
