Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) set aside the impugned order and remanded the cases back to the adjudicating authority. The appellants were granted the opportunity for cross-examination of material witnesses relied upon by the revenue authorities. This was based on the principle of natural justice, following precedents that denial of cross-examination violates fair procedure u/s 9D of the Central Excise Act. The adjudicating authority must allow cross-examination and follow due process for a fresh decision. The appellants were directed to cooperate for speedy disposal.
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) set aside the impugned order and remanded the cases back to the adjudicating authority. The appellants were granted the opportunity for cross-examination of material witnesses relied upon by the revenue authorities. This was based on the principle of natural justice, following precedents that denial of cross-examination violates fair procedure u/s 9D of the Central Excise Act. The adjudicating authority must allow cross-examination and follow due process for a fresh decision. The appellants were directed to cooperate for speedy disposal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
