https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331454 Refusal to permit cross-examination was treated as an appealable adjudicatory decision, so the statutory appeal was maintainable. Section 9D of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was held mandatory before statements recorded under Section 14 can be used in adjudication; the maker must be examined in the manner prescribed, and if the Revenue relies on the statement, the assessee must receive a real opportunity to cross-examine. Reliance on statements without following that procedure was unsustainable, and the impugned communication was set aside with the matter remitted for fresh adjudication in compliance with Section 9D and witness-examination requirements. en-us Thu, 23 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Aug 2016 16:09:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331454 Refusal to permit cross-examination was treated as an appealable adjudicatory decision, so the statutory appeal was maintainable. Section 9D of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was held mandatory before statements recorded under Section 14 can be used in adjudication; the maker must be examined in the manner prescribed, and if the Revenue relies on the statement, the assessee must receive a real opportunity to cross-examine. Reliance on statements without following that procedure was unsustainable, and the impugned communication was set aside with the matter remitted for fresh adjudication in compliance with Section 9D and witness-examination requirements. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 23 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331454