Joint and several duty liability set aside; individual liability and procedural objections require fresh adjudication.

Joint and several confirmation of duty demand and penalties against multiple noticees was held contrary to settled legal principles because each assessee's liability had not been independently determined. The impugned order was set aside on that ground. The Tribunal also required fresh examination of the objections relating to non-supply of documents and the request for cross-examination, as those procedural issues had to be reconsidered by the adjudicating authority in line with earlier directions. The matter was remanded for de novo adjudication on individual liability and for fresh decision on the procedural grievances.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand of duty and penalties confirmed jointly and severally against the noticees could be sustained, and whether the matter required remand for fresh decision including reconsideration of document supply and cross-examination.

Analysis: The Tribunal followed its earlier decision in an identical matter and held that confirmation of duty demand and imposition of penalties on a joint and several basis was contrary to settled principles of law. Since the liability of each assessee had not been independently determined, the impugned order could not be sustained. The grievance regarding non-supply of documents and the request for cross-examination were also required to be examined afresh by the adjudicating authority in accordance with the earlier directions of the Tribunal.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner for fresh adjudication on the individual liability of each assessee and for reconsideration of the procedural objections.

---