Introducing the βIn Favour Ofβ filter in Case Laws.
- βοΈ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- π Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws β


Just a moment...
Introducing the βIn Favour Ofβ filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws β


Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, finding a breach of natural justice because the adjudicatory authority failed to afford the appellant an adequate opportunity to cross-examine departmental witnesses. The Tribunal held that statements recorded under Section 138B retain relevance in departmental adjudication as well as criminal proceedings, but their use without permitting cross-examination vitiates the proceedings. The matter is remitted for de novo adjudication, directing the authority to permit effective cross-examination of witnesses, reassess the evidentiary weight of Section 138B statements in light of such testing, and pass a fresh reasoned order consistent with principles of fair hearing.