Natural justice challenge and clandestine removal allegations failed on documentary and corroborative evidence.

Denial of unrelied documents and cross-examination was treated as no breach of natural justice because the relied upon papers had already been supplied again and the request for cross-examination was unsupported and not pressed at the personal hearing. Cl ae clandestine manufacture and removal of aluminium wire was upheld on the basis of multiple machines, employees, seized incriminating documents, ledger entries recovered from a residence, customer confirmations, and kacchi parchies showing unaccounted raw material and clearance of finished goods. The evidence was considered sufficiently corroborative to sustain the demand, penalty, and extended period, and the appeal was rejected.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether denial of unrelied upon documents and cross-examination amounted to violation of natural justice; (ii) Whether the evidence on record established clandestine manufacture and removal of aluminium wire and justified the demand and penalty.

Issue (i): Whether denial of unrelied upon documents and cross-examination amounted to violation of natural justice.

Analysis: The relied upon documents had been supplied earlier and were again furnished subsequently under acknowledgement. The request for cross-examination was found to be unsupported by any specific reason, and the party did not press the request at the stage of personal hearing. On that basis, the objection based on denial of natural justice was rejected.

Conclusion: The plea of violation of natural justice failed and was decided against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the evidence on record established clandestine manufacture and removal of aluminium wire and justified the demand and penalty.

Analysis: The record showed a small manufacturing unit with multiple machines, employees, seized incriminating documents, entries in the ledger recovered from residential , confirmation from customers, and kacchi parchies indicating unaccounted purchase of raw material and clearance of finished goods. The findings were treated as sufficiently corroborative of clandestine activity, and the extended period was also upheld.

Conclusion: The allegations of clandestine removal were upheld and the assessee's challenge failed.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was rejected in full and the impugned order was affirmed.

---