TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1980X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... N OF INDIA 1 [ 2016 (4) TMI 1074 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] , COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AHMEDABAD - II VERSUS GUJARAT CYPROMET LTD. [ 2013 (7) TMI 245 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] clearly upheld right of the affected party to cross-examine witnesses irrespective of the fact that he had an opportunity or an access to the material on record. Thus, if there are any witnesses of whose statement the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, Gandhinagar, respondent No.2 in both the above petition, whereby request for cross-examination of witnesses was denied on the ground that respondent on cross-examination of witnesses present during the course of investigation is not warranted and further the rejection of request for cross-examination was on the premise that the partner of the petitioner firm had fully availed the opportunity of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Gujarat Cypromet Ltd., reported in 2017 (345) ELT 520 (Guj), Commissioner of Central Excise Customs vs. Chandan Tubes Metals Pvt. Ltd., reported in 2012 SCC Guj 4917, and Manek Chemicals Pvt. Ltd vs. Union of India reported in 2016 (334) ELT 302 (Guj) and Andaman Timber Industries vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata, Reported in (2016) 15 SCC 785, whereby the above decisions clearly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n whose statements are proposed to be relied on for confirming any part of the show cause notice. Thus, if there are any witnesses of whose statement the competent authority relies on or propose to rely, such witnesses would be permitted to be cross-examined. With the aforesaid observations and direction, both these petitions are allowed to the extent afore stated. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Cu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
