TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 810X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o acknowledgements given by them, evidencing any receipt of relied upon documents. This fact is required to be verified and if the acknowledgement receipts referred to by the Commissioner in his order are not by M/s R.K. Cigarettes P. Ltd., they have to be provided the relied upon documents. As regards the supply of non-relied upon documents, the said fact stand accepted by the Commissioner but he has referred to the fact that the appellant had refused to take delivery of the notice, sent to them for collection of the said documents. Without commenting upon the same, we note that the non relied upon documents do not stand supplied to the appellant and as such they have to be given a chance for the same. Appellant’s request for cross- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #8377; 40.67 crores against M/s R.K. Cigarettes P. Ltd. and ₹ 8.28 crores and ₹ 7.97 crores approximately. In addition there are confiscations with options to redeem on payment of redemption fine and imposition of penalties etc. on all the applicants. 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the applicants had made out a strong case for violation of principles of natural justice. Making his arguments, he submits that the case initiated with the search of main appellants unit i.e. M/s R.K. Cigarettes P. Ltd. on 22/10/02, subsequent search on 26/06/03 and 26/09/07. In as much as there were no proper Panchnama proceedings in respect of the search dated 26/06/03, the appellant approached the Hon ble High Court of Allahabad by way of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 18/03/05 addressed to the Managing Director of M/s RKCL with a copy to this office has forwarded a list of non RUDs which were returned to the authorize representative to the party on 18/03/05. For rest of the non RUDs the DGCEI, has further asked the RKCL vide their letter dated 08/09/05 to collect the same from the Directorate. From the above it is abundantly clear that the DGCEI has taken all measures to handover the non RUDs to the parties concerned. If anything remained undelivered, it is only the parties who can be held responsible for the same. 6.10 M/s RKCPL, in the case of duty demand of ₹ 40.67 crores, requested through their M.D. Shri R.K. Gupta, for inspection of originals RUDs which was allowed to them. They availed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and there is no finding by the Commissioner that such relied upon documents were supplied to M/s R.K. Cigarettes P. Ltd. against receipted acknowledgements. The use of the expression some parties shows that these documents might have been provided to the individuals involved in the matter. Learned advocate makes a statement that the main appellant M/s R.K. Cigarettes P. Ltd. has not received any relied upon documents and no receipted acknowledgements have been given by them. He submits that they were provided an opportunity to inspect the records on 03/12/12 when a part inspection was carried out. As is clear from para 6.10 of the order, no further inspection could be carried out as the appellant sought adjournments on the subsequent date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fect that there are no acknowledgements given by them, evidencing any receipt of relied upon documents. This fact is required to be verified and if the acknowledgement receipts referred to by the Commissioner in his order are not by M/s R.K. Cigarettes P. Ltd., they have to be provided the relied upon documents. This issue can be sorted out by the Commissioner in as much as the same relates to verification of the factual position. As regards the supply of non-relied upon documents, the said fact stand accepted by the Commissioner but he has referred to the fact that the appellant had refused to take delivery of the notice, sent to them for collection of the said documents. Without commenting upon the same, we note that the non relied upo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... set aside, as having been passed in violation of principles of natural justice. We order accordingly and remand all the matters to the Commissioner for fresh decision, after deciding all the relevant disputed issues about the supply of documents, the cross-examination and the filing of defence reply etc. by the appellant. 8. As the matter is quite old, we expect the Commissioner to complete the proceedings in a period of six months from the date of receipt of the order. Needless to say that the appellants would cooperate with the Adjudicating Authority and would not seek unnecessary adjournments. All the stay petitions and appeals get disposed of in above manner. The miscellaneous applications also get disposed of. (Dictated and pron ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
