TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (3) TMI 725
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(JCDR) For the Respondent JUDGEMENT Per S.S.Kang: Heard both sides. The present impugned order has passed in pursuance to the remand order dt.15.4.02 passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal held as under: 'As far as Appeals against impugned order No.36/2000 dt.3.11.2000, is concerned, we find substance in the submission of Shri P.C.Jain, learned Advocate, that the impugned Order is a non-speakin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appellant is that the present impugned order passed in violation to the principles of natural justice. The contention is that the case of the revenue is that certain incentive sheets showing more production than reflected in R.G.I were recovered from Shri M.L.Agarwal, Dy. General Manager and revenue recorded the statements of various persons to show that the appellants were producing the goods and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ition to the statement recorded during investigation showing higher production. There was other evidence also which shows that the appellants were producing goods which are not reflected in the statutory records 4.We find that the appellant before the adjudicating authority asked for cross examination of the above three witnesses. Their statements were relied upon by the adjudicating authority by....