9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 895X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e being disposed of together as the issue involved is identical though the same arise out of the 3 different impugned orders passed by Commissioner confirming demands of duties along with confirmation of interest against M/s. Metal Gems, M/s. Met India and M/s. Mehta Tubes Pvt. Ltd. and imposing penalties on them as also on other applicants/appellants in terms of the provisions of Rule 26 Central Excise Rules, 2002. Extensive arguments stand made in support and against the stay petitions by both the sides duly represented by Shri C. Hari Shankar, Advocate/Shri S.N. Kantawala, Advocate and Dr. M.K. Rajak, SDR. 2. The three main appellants M/s. Metal Gems, M/s. Met India and M/s. Mehta Tubes P. Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of copper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espect of trucks passing through the check posts. The Revenue has also relied upon the fact that the records/documents maintained by the transporter at Delhi office as well as UP border branch, there is nothing mentioned regarding issuance of lorry receipts, indicating thereby that such lorry receipts issued by the transporter were not in the ordinary course of their business. Further reliance has also been placed upon the records maintained by the appellants in support of the findings that imported copper ingots were neither received by them nor consumed inasmuch as during the days when such ingots were received, melting furnaces records indicate that furnaces were shut down/slowed down due to unavailability of raw materials. Further the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proof of transportation of imported goods to any other place, around Delhi border. There is no statement on record admitting that the goods have been sold in the local market. Further the appellants have contended that admittedly they have manufactured the final product on which duty has been paid thus indicating that the inputs in question were used by them. Further, the Department's suggestion that such inputs were procured from the local market as 'kabadi scrap' is also devoid of any merits inasmuch as the Department has not been able to establish, on record, any supplier of such 'kabadi scrap' or any evidence of purchase of the same or transportation of the same etc. As such, submits ld. Advocate that the entire cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce of the fact that they have requested for cross-examination of the witnesses, whose statements were relied upon in the show cause notice and have submitted before the Adjudicating Authority at the time of preliminary hearing that detailed submissions would be filed by them after completing the cross-examination of the witnesses and after supply of some of the documents. The impugned orders stand passed by the Commissioner by denying the opportunity of cross-examination and without dealing with the submissions made by them vide their letter dt. 18/12/2007 inasmuch as the impugned order was passed on 14/12/2007 i.e. before the filing of the written submissions. Ld, Advocate has submitted that vide their reply dt. 18/12/2007, which does not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the transporter at Ahmedabad, who was not connected with the transportation, was not justified. 5. In view of the above submissions, ld. Advocate prays that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be remanded for de-novo adjudication inasmuch as the pleas advanced by the appellants in their above written submissions do not stand considered by the Adjudicating Authority. 6. After hearing both the sides and after going through the impugned orders, we agree with the ld. Advocate that the impugned orders stand passed by the Commissioner in violation of principles of natural justice. The appellants' submission made at the time of hearing to allow cross-examination of the witnesses and to adjudicate the matter after filing reply ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred to and relied upon various expert opinions, evidences to show alternative routes and the information received under RTI Act to support their stand that the records maintained at the check posts are not reliable evidences. 8. In view of the above, we allow the stay petitions unconditionally and set aside the impugned orders and remand the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for fresh decision after allowing the cross-examination of the witnesses whose statements are relied upon and after taking into account the written submissions made by the appellants vide their letter dt. 18/12/2007. The appellants are at liberty to raise further pleas and make further submissions based upon the outcome of the cross-examination. All the stay peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
