9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 690X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sional statement admitted the clandestine removal and also confirmed the transaction recorded in the record of Shri Umesh Modi related to the clandestinely removed goods, they also admitted the payment has been made in cash. The said statement of Shri Dhiman has never been retracted - the goods have been clandestinely cleared by the appellant - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - E/87 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion order the appellant filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals), who upheld the order-in-original. The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was challenged before this Tribunal. This Tribunal vide order No. A/678/2009/SMC/C-IV dt. 6.11.2009 remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for conducting a cross-examination of Shri Umesh Modi as requested by the appellant. In the de novo proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that as per the remand direction by this Tribunal the adjudicating authority has given the ample opportunity for cross-examining the witness. However Shri Umesh Modi did not appear for the cross-examination, therefore the adjudicating authority passed the denovo adjudication order. On the basis of the evidence available on record, which includes the confessional statement of Shri Dhiman, the part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therefore the adjudicating authority in denovo adjudication order confirmed the demand on the basis of the evidences available. In these circumstances, the case be decided on the basis of the available evidences without going into the issue of cross-examination of Shri Umesh Modi. I find that Shri Dhiman Partner of the appellant firm in his confessional statement admitted the clandestine remova ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
