https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350561 The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Adjudicating Authority's decision to deny cross-examination. The court found the refusal justified based on factual and legal grounds, supported by precedents. It clarified that the CESTAT's remand order did not explicitly require cross-examination but focused on document furnishing. The petitioner was advised to pursue an appeal, with the period of the writ petition pending excluded from the limitation period for filing an appeal. en-us Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 May 2018 14:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350561 The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Adjudicating Authority's decision to deny cross-examination. The court found the refusal justified based on factual and legal grounds, supported by precedents. It clarified that the CESTAT's remand order did not explicitly require cross-examination but focused on document furnishing. The petitioner was advised to pursue an appeal, with the period of the writ petition pending excluded from the limitation period for filing an appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350561