| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(EX) 1022 CENTRAL EXCISE ACT, 1944
Section 35C
Where cross-examination of the persons was rejected without assigning any reasons, therefore, the arguments made by assessee were futile as order for rejection of cross-examination is not a speaking order and there was no merit in rejecting the request of cross examination without assigning any reasons, therefore, adjudicating authority was directed to consider the request of assessee for cross-examination of the persons and personal hearing be granted.
|
Order of Tribunal - Cross-examination of witnesses denied - Violation of principles of natural justice -
In the earlier round of litigation, this Tribunal, after hearing both sides had remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority with the observation that assessee's plea for cross-examination of deponents would also be considered by adjudicating authority. Assessee submitted that as he sought cross-examination of four witnesses whose statements were recorded during the investigation as the whole case of the department is on the basis of the statements of these persons. Therefore, the cross-examination of these persons was very necessary to arrive at the decision to decide the issue. As without any reasons, cross-examination was denied, therefore, there is violation of principles of natural justice. Held: To the earlier proceedings when the matter was remanded vide order, this Tribunal had directed the adjudicating authority to consider the plea for cross-examination of deponents by the adjudicating authority. By going through the order, cross-examination of persons was rejected without assigning any reasons, therefore, the arguments made by assessee were futile as order for rejection of cross-examination was not a speaking order. The way of working of the adjudicating authority cannot be appreciated in these terms. There was no merit in rejecting the request of cross-examination without assigning any reasons. Adjudicating authority was directed to consider the request of assessee for cross-examination of persons and personal hearing be granted.
REFERRED : Krishan Kishore Aggarwal v. Addl. Commr. of Customs 2019 (366) ELT 970 (Del-HC) : 2019 TaxPub(EX) 363 (Del), Jindal Drugs (P) Ltd. & Anr. v. UOI & Anr. 2016 (340) ELT 67 (P & H) : 2016 TaxPub(EX) 1668 (P&H), CCE & Anr. v. Parmarth Iron (P) Ltd. 2010 (26) ELT 514 (All-HC) : 2010 TaxPub(EX) 2256 (All) and Silicone Concepts International (P) Ltd. v. Pr. Commr. of Cus. 2019 (368) ELT 710 (Del-Trib).
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. :
IN THE CESTAT, CHANDIGARH BENCH
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|