9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot deal with the merits of the case and the same was remanded only on the short ground of non supply of documents. The impugned order passed by Commissioner is self-contradictory inasmuch as at one place he has recorded that the appellants filed written submission whereas in another Para, he observed that no reply was filed and as such the written submission filed by the appellants were not considered by him. Appeal disposed off. - E/591-592/2010-EX[DB] - 72298-72299/2018 - Dated:- 24-9-2018 - Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) For the Appellant : Shri S. K. Pahwa (Adv.) Rohan Pahwa (Adv.) For the Respondent : Shri Sandeep Kumar Singh (Dy. Commr.) AR ORDER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssing of an order by the Original Adjudicating Authority. 3. The said order was challenged by the appellants before Tribunal and vide Final Order Nos.386-388/2007-EX dated 03/07/2007, the matter was remanded to Commissioner for fresh adjudication by observing that the impugned order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice, as relied upon documents were not supplied to the assessee. The Tribunal further observed that Needless to say, in the remand proceedings, the appellants shall be given copies of the relevant documents and was also be given an opportunity to present their defence . 4. It is seen that during the de novo adjudication before Commissioner, the appellants made a request for cross examination of the depo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not deal with the merits of the case and the same was remanded only on the short ground of non supply of documents. Admittedly Adjudicating Authority was directed to give an opportunity to the appellants to put forth their case and as such liberty given by the Tribunal would also include allowing of cross examination, sought by the appellants. 7. We further note that the impugned order passed by Commissioner is self-contradictory inasmuch as at one place he has recorded that the appellants filed written submission whereas in another Para, he observed that no reply was filed and as such the written submission filed by the appellants were not considered by him. We have also seen the copy of the written submission filed by the appellants, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
