https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446328 CESTAT Allahabad allowed the appeal by remand, finding that the Commissioner improperly imposed penalties under both Section 112(a) and 112(b) for the same offense involving seized gold bars, demonstrating lack of understanding of legal provisions. The tribunal held that the appellant was wrongly denied cross-examination of two key persons whose statements were relied upon by revenue. The order was passed hastily without proper findings on basic issues or legal provisions. The matter was remanded to the Original Adjudicating Authority with directions to permit cross-examination before deciding the case. en-us Thu, 02 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Apr 2024 14:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446328 CESTAT Allahabad allowed the appeal by remand, finding that the Commissioner improperly imposed penalties under both Section 112(a) and 112(b) for the same offense involving seized gold bars, demonstrating lack of understanding of legal provisions. The tribunal held that the appellant was wrongly denied cross-examination of two key persons whose statements were relied upon by revenue. The order was passed hastily without proper findings on basic issues or legal provisions. The matter was remanded to the Original Adjudicating Authority with directions to permit cross-examination before deciding the case. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 02 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446328