Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 10 - CESTAT CHANDIGARHClandestine removal - excesses of stock found - Cross examination of various witnesses not granted - Section 9D of the Act not followed - test reports as regards samples not found - confiscation of inputs u/r 25 of CER - Statement of Sh. Sudhakar Dwevedi was not provided at the stage of adjudication and at the stage of Commissioner (Appeals). Held that:- The request for cross examination has not been examined afresh by the adjudicating authority and there is adoption of findings of previous adjudicating authority without fresh application of mind - Such an approach is also in violation of the principles of natural justice. Procedure laid down under Section 9D of the Act followed - Held that:- The adjudicating authority has not followed the procedure laid down under Section 9D of the Act in respect of the goods found at factory premises and the goods lying at the head office. The procedure has not been followed in respect of other goods also by the adjudicating authority. It is settled position in law that the procedure laid down under Section 9D of the Act is required to be followed by the adjudicating authority. The adjudicating authority has not followed the procedure laid down under Section 9D of the Act and also violated the tenets of natural justice - the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the matter requires to be adjudicated afresh by following the procedure laid down under Section 9D ibid and by following the principles of natural justice. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
|