https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390654 Statements recorded during central excise investigation cannot be relied upon in adjudication unless Section 9D procedure is properly followed, including effective cross-examination where it is necessary to test truth and relevance. Merely fixing a date for cross-examination, without completing the process, does not satisfy the statutory safeguard. The commentary notes that the safeguard is substantive and cannot be treated as a formality, while proceedings should also avoid unnecessary delay or abuse. On this basis, reliance on the statements was held unsustainable and the matter required remand for fresh adjudication after granting a proper opportunity for cross-examination. en-us Mon, 05 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jan 2020 10:05:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390654 Statements recorded during central excise investigation cannot be relied upon in adjudication unless Section 9D procedure is properly followed, including effective cross-examination where it is necessary to test truth and relevance. Merely fixing a date for cross-examination, without completing the process, does not satisfy the statutory safeguard. The commentary notes that the safeguard is substantive and cannot be treated as a formality, while proceedings should also avoid unnecessary delay or abuse. On this basis, reliance on the statements was held unsustainable and the matter required remand for fresh adjudication after granting a proper opportunity for cross-examination. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 05 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390654