9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 290X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in favor of appellant. - E/57116/2013-E/57125/2013-EX[DB], (E/MISC/50124/2015-E/MISC/50133/2015) - A/72373-72382/2018-EX[DB] - Dated:- 18-9-2018 - SHRI ANIL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER(JUDICIAL) And SHRI ANIL G. SHAKKARWAR, MEMBER(TECHNICAL) Shri B.L. Narasimhan (Advocate) Shri Ayush Agarwal (Advocate) for the Appellant (s) Shri Rajeev Ranjan (Addl. Commr.) (A.R.) for the Revenue ORDER Per ANIL G. SHAKKARWAR : The above-stated appeals are arising out of common impugned Order-in-Original No.MP(Dem.-03/2012) 04 of 2013 dated 23.01.2013 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise Service Tax, Allahabad. Therefore, they are taken together for decision. 2. After hearing both sides duly represented by Shri B.L.Narasimh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned order and remand the matter to the Commissioner for re-adjudication. The appellants shall be entitled to reiterate their request for cross examination, and Commissioner would decide the same in accordance with law and precedent decision of the various judicial and quasi judicial authorities. We make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. 3. We note that ld.Counsel for appellants has taken us through the correspondences subsequent to passing of the said final order between the appellants and the adjudicating authority. We note that the officers on behalf of the adjudicating authority through letter dated 16.03.2012 informed the appellants that the persons whose cross-examination was sought b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es were retracted later on. There is no relevancy of asking for cross examination of these persons. It is just a novel modus operandi adopted by the notices of the case to delay the proceedings. 4. Further the ld.Counsel also submitted that the remaining portion of the order is reproduction of the show cause notice and there is no finding recorded by the original authority. We further note that through impugned order personal penalty was imposed on M/s.Sahu Enterprises, M/s.Ganesh Traders and Shri Rakesh Kumar Sahu, who were imposed penalties through earlier order dated 25.03.2010 and as informed by ld.Counsel such penalties were paid up by the said appellants and they did not file any appeal against the said order dated 25.03.2010 be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
