TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1661X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the settled proposition of law and as it is also not disputed that the statements, which have been taken into consideration for casting the order, the persons making those statements have not been permitted to be cross-examined on the perception that the same was only a delaying tactic - Therefore, without observing anything further on the merits, the order is required to be quashed and set aside only on the ground of authority s denial to grant cross-examination, as requested, had vitiated the order and, therefore, the concerned respondent no.2 shall afford an opportunity to cross-examine the persons, authorities, whose statements have been relied upon as well as the officers involved in the investigation and cast the order afresh after a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mination vitiating the order is in fact covered by the number of judgments, which have been cited on behalf of the petitioner. 4. Present petition has been taken out under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with following prayers. a) Your Lordships be Pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature of a writ of Certiorari and or any other writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned order in original no.SUREXCUS- COM-03-18-19 dtd 06.03.2019 and further direct the Adjudicating authority to re-hear and re-adjudicate their case by following all the basic principles of natural justice and then pass the necessary orders afresh. And or in the alternative b) Your Lordships be ple ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts admitting their involvement in the diversion of AGU. The demand of cross-examination of the co-noticees is just modus to delay proceedings. In view of the above position the rejection of the request for cross examination of the witnesses does not violate the principles of natural justice. 5. The Court is of the view that the order, which has been rendered is essentially based upon the statements, which have been relied upon by the department, then the persons making those statements were required to be permitted to be crossexamined by the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner invited this Court s attention to the latest order passed by this Court on 6.9.2018 in the proceedings of Special Civil Application No.10629 of 2018 with Spe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ia reported in 2016 (334) ELT 302 (Guj) and Andaman Timber Industries vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata II, reported in (2016) 15 SCC 785, whereby the above decisions 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. 6. In the instant case, this Court also do not propose to examine any other aspect or merits, else it would not be proper thereafter to remand the matter and as the counsel for the respondents also could not controvert or dispute the settled proposition of law and as it is also not disputed that the statements, which have been taken into consideration for casting the order, the persons making those sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
