Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (4) TMI 1258

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the respondents. 2. Present appeal has been filed by the Revenue under Section 35G of Central Excise Act, 1944 arising from the order passed by Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad dated 9.4.2018 in Appeal Nos. E/54246/2014, E/54249/2014, E/54251/2014, E/54253/2014, E/54255/2014, E/54257/2014, E/54260/2014 and 54289/2014 filed by Lalit Kumar Agarwal, Raj Kumar Agarwal, Sanjay Agarwal, Priyansh Agarwal, Parmarth Steel and Alloys P Ltd., Priyansh Agarwal Legal Heir of Late Raj Kumar Agarwal, Parmarth Iron Pvt. Ltd. and Kamakhya Steel P Ltd. respectively. By that detailed order, the Tribunal has allowed the appeal primarily on the reasoning, despite opportunity granted to the Revenue in terms of the ear .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... written detailed defence reply filed by the main appellant M/s Parmarth Iron Pvt. Ltd. and without there being any personal hearing, we are of the view that the impugned order is passed with gross violation of principles of natural justice. Accordingly, we are of the view that the same is required to be set aside. The balance documents which are required to be supplied to the appellants/noticees would be supplied by the office of Commissioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the order. Further the appellants request for cross examination of the witnesses whose statements are being relied upon by the Revenue would also be examined by the adjudicating authority in the light of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court (Div .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nue to find out whether these five person were on roll of PIPL. In absence of any such evidence on record, these five persons cannot be assumed to be employees of PIPL and hence PIPL was not under any obligation to accept the letters for service on these five persons. 33. Coming to the question as to whether these five persons namely Sri Manmohan Gautam, Sri Bhagirath Roy, Sri Shailendra Gupta, Sri Pankaj Agarwal & Sri Rajesh Sharma were employees of PIPL or not, records of the case shows that except statements of these persons there is no evidence to show these five persons were employees of PIPL at any point of time. Except from recording statements, revenue has not made any enquiry in this regard. On the contrary, PIPL in its reply to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ricity Supply Co. Ltd. v. Workman and Ors(1971) 2 SCC 61, it was held:- "We do not think that the statements should have been received in evidence as the appellant had taken no step to produce the persons who made the statements, for cross- examination by the respondent. It was the duty of the appellant (revenue) to have produced the persons whose statements were sought to be relied/proved for the cross-examination of the respondent." Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CCE v. Vishnu & Co. Pvt. Ltd.2016 (232) ELT 793 (Del) has rejected similar contention of department in the following words:- "42. The contention that it is the responsibility of the noticees to produce the witnesses for cross - examination is a strange one, consid .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... from Geeta Nargi pertains to PIPL, sales and purchase ledger accounts includes accounted and unaccounted clearances of PIPL, cash collected at Navyug Market, Ghaziabad against sales made by PIPL etc., cannot be accepted and cannot be considered as evidence against Appellant." 7. Having recorded such findings, the Tribunal then proceeded to take note of the applicable law and has reasoned amongst others on the strength of the ratio in Bareilly Electricity Supply Co. Ltd. Vs. Workmen and Ors - (1971 2 SCC 617)- in absence of opportunity to cross-examine the witness, the oral statement made by such witness, may not have been relied and read as evidence to prove the fact allegation with respect to which such statement may have been made. The .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates