2016 (11) TMI 813

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... al is directed against Orders-in- -Original No. 06/SK-06/2005/Thane-I  dated 10/3/2005  passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane-I.  The appellant filed this appeal challenging  imposition of penalty  of Rs. 25 lacs under Section 114 of Customs Act and Rs. 1 Crore under Section 72 and 112 of Customs Act, 1962. 2.  Shri. V.M. Doiphode, Ld. Counsel for the a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... de on this ground itself. 3.  Shri. M.K. Mall, Ld. Asstt. Commissioner(A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4.  On careful consideration of submissions made by both sides, we find that  it is undisputed fact from the records as well as from the  submission made by Ld. Counsel  that during the adjudication  the appel .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rder it is observed that  Ld. Commissioner has not  even dealt this request of the appellant as he neither allowed the cross examination nor even  rejected the request.  Therefore  the Ld. Commissioner has not considered the request for cross examination  in the impugned order.  Therefore we find that Adjudicating authority has gravely erred inasmuch as  has .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X