TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (9) TMI 90
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2002-03. The First Appellant used to buy part of its requirement of raw materials like copper winding wire and PVC coated copper wire from M/s. Satvik Industries, C-157, Mayapuri Industrial Area, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "SI") and was taking Cenvat credit. Investigation with SI showed that SI was in some cases supplying just invoices without any goods to some of its customers to enable them to take fraudulent Cenvat credit. The matter was investigated with reference to supplies made to the First Appellant and a case of fraudulent credits availed was made against it. A show cause notice was issued and adjudicated which resulted in adverse consequences to the Appellants. Demands for duty were confirmed along with interest payabl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wan Driver and brother of the owner of Vehicle No. DL 1 RF 3638 (This auto-rickshaw carried one consignment); (vii) R.N. Vijan owner of vehicle No. DL 1R 2540 (This auto-rickshaw carried one consignment); Out of the above, item (ii) is not incriminating the two appellants. 7. There were 74 impugned consignments. Out of these 18 consignments were transported by vehicles owned by Shri Rajesh Jain or his company. That is, vehicle Number DL 9 CB 1541, Maruti Van carried 4 consignments, DL 9CB 0981, Matiz car carried 10 consignments and DL 9CC 8518, Indica Car, carried 4 consignments. 8. I note that the facts stated in para 4 of the SCN is a distorted translated re-production of the facts stated in the statement dated 2-4-2004 given ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der and first appellate orders are contested is denial of natural justice by denying cross-examination of persons whose statements are relied upon. (ii) The second ground is that the statement of Mr. Jain does not say that all his invoices were fake but he said that his invoices said to cover more than 500 kgs were fake. It is contested that only very few invoices accounted by the Appellants covered goods weighing more than 500 kgs. In fact only 6 out of 74 impugned consignments weighed more than 500 kgs. (iii) The third argument given is that during investigation stage the Appellants were not confronted with the evidences appearing against them. A statement was recorded without showing any evidence against them. During th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....argument that not allowing cross-examination of some witnesses cannot be fatal. Actually this is an issue to be decided based on the facts of each case considering the relevant facts stated by the person concerned, the points to be tested in cross-examination, other evidences in the case, whether there is undue difficulty in allowing cross-examination, etc. The department may deny cross-examination of witnesses at its own peril, quoting decisions in its favour without appreciating the facts and the circumstances in each case. 13. The reason for not allowing the cross-examination of Shri Jain is not acceptable at all. If he was a beneficiary and not likely to depose against the Appellants who were also benefited from the alleged fraud, ho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the owner of the vehicle was not allowed. 15. Another argument given is that the auto-rickshaws in question were registered for transport of passengers and hence these vehicles could not have carried goods. This argument also is not acceptable when seen in the context of ground realties in this country. Quite often auto-rickshaws are used for transporting goods. Such act may amount to violation of provisions in Motor Vehicles Act and Rules made thereunder. Such offence, if any is to be taken cognizance of by the authorities under the said Act. But a deductive logic used to prove that the impugned goods could not have been transported at all is faulty. 16. This case is based on a statement that most of the invoices issued by SI cov....