Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal overturns order due to procedural errors, granting re-adjudication opportunity.

        Alliance Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Aspen Online Pvt. Ltd. and Avon Tubetech Pvt. Ltd. Versus CCE, Delhi

        Alliance Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Aspen Online Pvt. Ltd. and Avon Tubetech Pvt. Ltd. Versus CCE, Delhi - 2016 (338) E.L.T. 749 (Tri. - Chan.) Issues Involved:

        1. Non-supply of non-relied upon documents before adjudication.
        2. Lack of opportunity for personal hearing.
        3. Denial of cross-examination of witnesses.
        4. Reliance on statements of witnesses without following the procedure under Section 9D of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

        Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

        1. Non-supply of Non-relied Upon Documents:

        The appellants argued that the non-relied upon documents were supplied only after the final hearing, which constituted a gross violation of the principles of natural justice. The tribunal acknowledged this contention, stating, 'Admittedly non relied upon documents have supplied after final hearing of the case.' This delay in providing essential documents hindered the appellants' ability to prepare a proper defense.

        2. Lack of Opportunity for Personal Hearing:

        The appellants contended that they were not afforded a sufficient opportunity for a personal hearing. The tribunal found merit in this argument, noting, 'as after supplying of non-relied upon documents, no effective personal hearing was given to the appellant, therefore, there is gross violation of principles of natural justice.' This failure to provide a meaningful opportunity for the appellants to present their case further compromised the fairness of the adjudication process.

        3. Denial of Cross-examination of Witnesses:

        The appellants argued that their request for cross-examination of witnesses whose statements were relied upon was unjustly denied. The tribunal agreed, citing precedents such as Basudev/Garg vs CC and J.K. Cigarettes Ltd., which emphasized the importance of cross-examination in ensuring the credibility and reliability of witness statements. The tribunal stated, 'the adjudicating authority has not given an opportunity of cross examination of witness, therefore, the same is in violation of principles of natural justice.'

        4. Reliance on Statements of Witnesses Without Following Section 9D:

        The appellants challenged the reliance on statements of third parties without adhering to the procedure outlined in Section 9D of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The tribunal noted that the adjudicating authority failed to follow the prescribed procedure, which requires that the person who made the statement must first be examined as a witness, and only then can the statement be admitted in evidence if deemed necessary in the interest of justice. The tribunal referenced the case of Kuber Tobacco India Ltd., where it was observed that 'the procedure prescribed in sub-section (1) of section 9D is required to be scrupulously followed, as much as in adjudication proceedings as in criminal proceedings relating to prosecution.'

        Conclusion:

        The tribunal concluded that the adjudicating authority had not adhered to the principles of natural justice and had failed to follow the procedure laid down under Section 9D of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside. The tribunal provided the adjudicating authority with the liberty to re-adjudicate the matter, ensuring compliance with Section 9D and the principles of natural justice. The appeals were disposed of accordingly.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found