TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 402X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on by the department for confirmation of the adjudged demand, but no such opportunity has been given to the appellant for such cross examination. Thus, it is a case of violation of the principles of natural justice - the matter should also be remanded to the original authority for affording opportunity of cross-examination of the witness Shri Vikas Gupta, authorised signatory of M/s Vikas Enter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order dated 29.11.2016, upheld the adjudication order. Hence, the present appeal is before the Tribunal. 2. The ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant, at the outset, submits that the request made by the appellant for cross-examination of one of the witnesses Shri Vikram Gupta, authorised signatory of M/s Vikas Enterprises was denied by the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of the witnesses. 3. On the other hand, the ld. DR appearing for Revenue reiterates the findings recorded in the impugned order. 4. Heard both sides and perused the records. 5. I find from paragraph 6 of the impugned order that though, the appellant has specifically requested for cross-examination of Shri E/51089/17-SM Vikas Gupta, whose statement has been relied on by the department f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
