9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 980X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant a demand of duty of ₹ 4,99,807/- (including education cess) under the proviso to Section 11A (1) of Central Excise Act with interest thereon under Section 11AB of the Act. The adjudicating authority appropriated an amount of ₹ 58,000/- paid by the party towards such demand. It also imposed a penalty of ₹ 4,99,807/- on this appellant under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... December 2006. It appears, this case was built up mainly on the basis of (a) statements of one Shri Umesh V. Modi recorded under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act and (b) original records seized from his possession. Shri Umesh V. Modi, in his statements, stated that he had brokered sale of the above goods by the appellant. The documents recovered by the investigators of the department from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the original authority did not consider the plea for cross-examination of Shri Umesh V Modi, though opportunities for inspection of the records were given. In the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), there is no independent appreciation of evidence. Whatever was recorded by the original authority was upheld without proper scrutiny or application of mind. It needs to be particularly noted t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner of Central Excise, Surat I 2007 (209) ELT 190 (Tri-Mumbai). 5. In the aforesaid circumstances, I am inclined to allow this appeal by way of remand. Accordingly, after setting aside the orders of the lower authorities, I direct the original authority to pass fresh order of adjudicating in accordance with law and the principles of natural justice. It is particularly directed that the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
