TMI Blog1988 (12) TMI 245X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on behalf of the appellants. He has stated that there was denial of principles of natural justice. He has referred to internal page 22-23 of the Order-in-original where the appellants had requested for the cross-examination of the three witnesses, namely, Shri O.P. Kumar, Supdt. (Preventive), Central Excise, Faridabad, the officer of E.S.I. Faridabad and Superintendent, Central Excise, Sonepat. 3. Shri Kohli, the learned consultant has stated that the appellant s request for the cross-examination was not allowed rather the appellant was asked the points on which the appellant wanted to cross-examine the witnesses. He has argued that it is contrary to the provisions of law. He has stated that there was denial of principles of natural ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned, to which the party vide their letter dated 20.5.88 submitted a general reply stating that it is difficult for them to give in advance any particular points on which cross-examination is to be done. Thus, it was clear that the party wanted to cross-examine the three persons more in the nature of fishing enquiry/examination to put up their defence and they had really nothing particular requiring any cross-examination. Insofar as the three persons are concerned, their evidence is already part of the show cause notice and is known to the party as a matter of record. Excepting asking for a general cross-examination of three persons, since the party has not specified or even indicated any particular point of fact or law requiring cross-exami ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ttled law though Indian Evidence Act is strictly not applicable in Revenue proceedings but the principles of Indian Evidence Act are applicable. 7. The Supreme Court in the case of Kalra Glue Factory v. Sales-tax Tribunal and Others reported in (1987) 167 ITR 498 had held as under - In arriving at the conclusion that the transaction entered into by the appellant firm was in the course of inter-State trade, the Sales-tax Tribunal relied, inter alia on the statement of a partner of another firm which had not been tested by cross-examination. The Supreme Court set aside the order of the Tribunal as well as the order in revision of the High Court therefrom and remitted the matter to the Tribunal giving directions regarding the documents of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
