9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 1091X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... General Of India [Through VC] With Shri Prasanna Prasad, Advocate) ORDER PER JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI With Consent of the parties, heard finally at motion stage. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs :- "(i) Allow the present Writ Petition; (ii) Issue an appropriate writ/ orders/ directions in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents to release/ provide the original copy of documents seized by the Respondent from the premises of the Petitioner during various searches conducted and not relied upon in the show cause notices dated 08.06.2022 and 03.08.2022, to the Petitioner in a time-bound manner. (iii) Issue an appropriate writ/ orders/ directions in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... RUI/ADD/GST/ 2022-2023 dated 08.06.2022 and 50/DGGI/ RUI/ADG/C.Ex./ 2022-2023 dated 03.08.2022 to petitioner respectively whereby a total demand of GST and Cess Rs. 19,462,273,010/- (Rupees Nineteen Hundred Forty-Six Crores Twenty-Two Lakhs Seventy Three Thousand and Ten Only) comprising of CGST of Rs. 75,82,19,416/-, SGST of Rs. 75,82,19,416/- and Cess of Rs. 1794,58,34,178/- has been issued against the Petitioner Company and other persons under the false pretext of clandestine supply of filter cigarettes by the Petitioner Company without cover of invoices and tax payments for the period from 01.07.2017 to 10.06.2020. In order to enable the petitioner to file reply and contest the said show cause notices dated 08.06.2022 and 03.08.2022 in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eized by the Respondent from the premises of the Petitioner during various searches conducted and not relied upon in the show cause notices dated 08.06.2022 and 03.08.2022. Hence it is submitted that Respondent be directed to permit the petitioner to cross examine witnesses whose evidence has been relied upon in the show cause notices. In support of the said submission, counsel for the petitioner has relied upon judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Andaman Timber Industries Vs Commissioner of Central Excise 2016(15) SCC 785 and Gujrat High Court in Rajputana Stainless Ltd. Vs Union of India (2023) 23 GSTR-OL 583. 4. Per Contra, Learned Counsel for Respondents has submitted that he has no objection if original non-relied documents are ordered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... produced by an assessee or any other person, which have not been relied on for the issue of notice under the Act or the rules made thereunder, shall be returned within thirty days of the issue of said notice or within thirty days from the date of expiry of the period for issue of said notice:" 7. Provided that the Principal Commissioner of Central Excise or Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, may order for the retention of such books of accounts or documents, for reasons to be recorded in writing and the Central Excise Officer shall intimate to the assessee or such person about such retention." 8. In the said context, we are in conformity with the view of this court as taken in Methodex Systems Ltd. Vs Union of India (20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the show cause notices dated 08.06.2022 and 03.08.2022 and it is expected from the adjudicating authority that the said right to cross-examine would be afforded to the petitioner at appropriate stage of proceedings, as principles of natural justice are required to be adhered to while conducting adjudication proceedings. At this juncture, fruitful reference can be made to judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Andaman Timber Industries Vs Commissioner of Central Excise 2016 (15) SCC 785 in which it has been held as hereunder:- "According to us, not allowing the assessee to cross-examine the witnesses by the Adjudicating Authority though the statements of those witnesses were made the basis of the impugned order is a serious flaw which makes t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rity simply relied upon the price list as maintained at the depot to determine the price for the purpose of levy of excise duty. Whether the goods were, in fact, sold to the said dealers/witnesses at the price which is mentioned in the price list itself could be the subject matter of cross-examination. Therefore, it was not for the Adjudicating Authority to presuppose as to what could be the subject matter of the cross-examination and make the remarks as mentioned above. We may also point out that on an earlier occasion when the matter came before this Court in Civil Appeal No. 2216 of 2000, order dated 17.03.2005 was passed remitting the case back to the Tribunal with the directions to decide the appeal on merits giving its reasons for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
