Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2023 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 64 - CESTAT CHANDIGARHClandestine Removal - fabrication of production records - issuance of bogus invoices without actual production and clearance of goods with an intent to claim inadmissible refund (N/N. 56/2002) /self credit of duty paid through PLA fraudulently - facilitating in availment of inadmissible CENVAT credit to their buyers fraudulently - HELD THAT:- As per the allegation in the show cause notice, the investigation were undertaken by the Merrut Commissionerte and it was found that the suppliers of raw- material to the appellant were non-existent. Further, the demands have been confirmed only on the basis that there was no alternative source of electricity generation which is factually incorrect. Further, it is found that on the basis of the same investigation, the demands were confirmed against many parties and some of the decisions have been rendered by this Tribunal on the same allegations and the demands have been dropped. The issue involved in the present appeals is no more res-integra as this Tribunal as well as the Tribunal at Allahabad has consistently set-aside the demands by considering all the evidences produced before them. The impugned order passed without affording an opportunity of cross examining the witnesses in spite of the request made by the appellant for cross examination of the witnesses and in the absence of cross examination, their statements cannot be relied upon as held by the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of M/S JINDAL DRUGS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER [2016 (6) TMI 956 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT]. The impugned order is not sustainable in law - Appeal allowed.
|