9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 199X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the shortage of raw material /finished goods during the visit of the preventive officers. 3. Ld Counsel at the outset submits that instead of going into merits, the issue needs to be reconsidered by the Adjudicating Authority only on the ground of the denial of the principles of natural justice, in as much as the appellants were not granted cross examination and were not informed about the decision of non-granting of the cross examination before hand and rejection of cross examination is conveyed only through OIO. He would submit that the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Mahek Glazes Pvt Ltd vs Union of India - 2014(300)ELT.25 (Guj) has laid down the law and produces copy of the order. 4. Ld DR reiterates the findings of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sent case. Further as regards their contention that the inquiry was not conducted with the buyers, it may be mentioned that when the authorised persons and Director of the assessee themselves admitted the shortages and confirmed the illicit removal of such short found goods, there is no need to make further probe with the buyers, since the facts narrated in panchnama an admission given by Director, manager and excise clerk of the assessee are sufficient evidence on records. Hence their such contention is not tenable. 8. We find strong force in the contentions raised by the Ld Counsel that Hon'ble High Court has settled the law as to the question of denial of cross examination in the case of Mahek Glazes Pvt Ltd (Supra). We respectfully rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng authority could not have finally adjudicated the issues. If he was of the opinion that the request for cross-examination was not tenable, by giving reasons, he could have rejected it. We wonder what would have happened, if he was inclined to accept such a request. In such a situation, he himself could not have finally disposed of the show cause notice proceedings. In either case, the petitioners had a right to know the outcome of their application. 7. Merely because the Commissioner was of the opinion that the petitioners had made such a request somewhat belatedly, would not permit him to, in the facts of the present case, deal with such an application only in the final order itself. Sum total of this discussion is that we are inclined ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
