9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1537X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id persons has been sought by the appellants. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the request of cross-examination, at the same time he relied upon all the statements for adjudicating the show cause notice. In terms of Section 9D of the Central Excise Act, 1944, if the Adjudicating Authority wants to rely upon any statement, it is incumbent upon him to test the witness before relying upon the statement - In the present case, it is more necessary when the appellants themselves have asked for cross-examination of the witnesses. The matter is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for passing a fresh order after granting cross-examination of witnesses as requested by the appellants - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Appeal No. E/1207 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the statements of various witnesses. The appellant have asked for the cross-examination of such witnesses by making a special request to the Adjudicating Authority in their submissions. However, the Adjudicating Authority has not granted the cross-examination and passed the adjudication order. The rejection of cross-examination was also mentioned in the adjudication order itself. He submits that even if the Adjudicating Authority was not inclined to grant the cross-examination, he should have passed a separate order which could have been appealed against. Therefore, the Adjudicating Authority has not followed the principles of natural justice. He further submitted that since the entire case is based on the statements of various persons, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are ample evidences other than the statements therefore, there was no necessity of granting cross-examination of the persons whose statements are recorded. He submits that the case is otherwise proved beyond doubt on the basis of other evidences. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the record. We find that the issue involved is the alleged fraudulent availment of Cenvat credit. The department tried to establish that the appellant have not received the goods and they have only received the invoices on the basis of which the credit was availed. To establish the said charges, the statements of various persons were recorded and cross-examination of the said persons has been sought by the appellants ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
