2019 (5) TMI 324

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and payment of duty, hence it is concluded that the material on which the credit availed by the appellant has not been received by them. The appellant vehemently argued to rebut the said statement of M/s Chhail Singh Deora by way of cross-examination. The appellant should be allowed cross-examination of the witness Mr. Chhail Singh Deora, whose evidence is vital and relied in confirming the demand. Matter remanded to the adjudicating authority for cross-examination of the witnesses Shri Chhail Singh Deora and decide the matter accordingly - appeal allowed by way of remand.
DR. D.M. MISRA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri Stebin Mathew, Shri Rajesh Ostwal, Advocate for the Appellant Shri N.N. Prabhudesai, Supdt. (AR) for the Respondent ORDER .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... demand against the appellant. He also submits that the statements of Director of M/s Shah Foils Ltd., who sold the raw material to the appellants received in their factory and utilized in the course of manufacture of the finished goods, are in their favour. He submits that denial of cross-examination of Shri Chhail Singh Deora resulted into violation of the principles of natural justice. In support, he refers to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-II - 2015 (324) ELT 641 (SC). 4. Per contra, learned AR for the Revenue Shri N.N. Prabhudesai submitted that there are other corroborating evidences by which the Department could able to establish that app .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rom the records, I find that both the authorities below referred to and relied upon the statement in arriving at the conclusion of credit of ₹ 44,25,702/- was availed wrongly by the appellant. In these circumstances, in my opinion, the appellant should be allowed cross-examination of the witness Mr. Chhail Singh Deora, whose evidence is vital and relied in confirming the demand, in view of the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the catena of cases including Andaman Timber Industries (supra). 6. In the result, the impugned order is set aside and appeals are remanded to the adjudicating authority for cross-examination of the witnesses Shri Chhail Singh Deora and decide the matter accordingly. Appeals are allowed b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X