Material evidence and denied records can vitiate adjudication, making remand necessary for fresh consideration of the dispute.

Material documentary evidence central to the dispute must be examined, and an adjudication based mainly on investigation statements cannot stand where retractions, job work bills, cheques, bank entries and other records are ignored. The Tribunal found that the grievance of non-supply of seized documents remained unresolved and that submissions on permissible job work, alleged export, limitation, bona fide belief and production capacity had not been considered. The impugned order was therefore unsustainable and the matter required fresh adjudication with proper examination of the relevant documents and defences.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned adjudication order was liable to be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh decision on account of alleged non-supply of documents and non-consideration of crucial evidence relating to job work, capacity and export of the goods.

Analysis: The appeal challenged the finding that the assessee had undertaken prohibited job work and cleared grey fabrics without duty. The record showed a grievance that seized documents were not fully supplied and that the adjudicating authority had proceeded mainly on statements recorded during investigation without dealing with retractions and the documentary evidence produced by the appellants. The Tribunal found that the job work bills, cheques, bank entries and other materials relied upon by the appellants were crucial to the controversy, yet had not been considered by the adjudicating authority. The Tribunal also noted that the appellants' additional submissions on permissible job work under the relevant export scheme, the alleged export of the goods, limitation, bona fide belief and production capacity had not been examined.

Conclusion: The matter required fresh adjudication and the impugned order could not be sustained without examining the relevant documents and submissions.

Ratio Decidendi: Where material documentary evidence central to the dispute is not considered and the grievance of denial of access to relied upon records remains unresolved, the adjudication is vitiated and remand is warranted.

---