TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (1) TMI 217
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ands imposed on Shri Bharat Modi Managing Director and Rs. 5 lakhs (Rupees Five lakhs only) on Shri MK Jain, General Manager (Finance) of the said appellant, in terms of Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules, 1944. As per facts on record, M/s. Kusum Ingots & Alloys (hereinafter referred to appellant) are engaged in the manufacture of steel ingots and other rerollable products falling under Chapter 72 to Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellants factory was put to search by the officers on 13.12.1994, but no incriminating documents were found. However, the officers resumed the copies of the endorsed gate passes on the basis which appellant had received the inputs and had availed the credit. 2. It is on record that the search of the appellants factory was conducted on the basis of the information received from Income Tax Department. However, the Department further investigated the matter and recorded the statements of various traders. As it was found that the appellants were procuring the raw-materials from M/s. Steel and Scrap, M/s. Ambassy Steel and M/s. KS Steels, the statements of the concerned persons of the said input suppliers were recorded. 3. As per the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....emand against the appellant have been mainly confirmed on the basis of the statements of suppliers of MS Scrap, which is raw-material for the manufacture of MS alloy steel, the cross-examination of the input supplier becomes absolutely necessary. The Tribunal further observed that it is on the same basis that the proceedings were initiated against the appellant by the Income Tax Department, which proceedings have been set aside by the appellate commissioner of the Income Tax, in which case no cross-examination of Revenues witnesses has resulted in contravention of the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal accordingly remanded the matter to the commissioner for fresh decision after extending the appellant the opportunity to cross-examine the input suppliers. 8. The present impugned order stands passed by the commissioner in de novo proceedings. 9. During the course of de novo adjudication, the cross-examination of five persons was undertaken. Shri Nathulal Jain and Shri Madanlal were the transporters, who during the course of cross-examination accepted the having supplied the goods to the appellant. Shri Kishan Gopal Khandelwal stated that as it was his son Shri Anil Khande....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roposition, they have relied upon the following decisions:- (i) J & K Cigerettes Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise [2011 (22) STR 225 (Del.)]. (ii) Basudev Garg Vs. CC [2013 (294) ELT 353 (Del.)] (iii) CCE, Meerut Vs. Parmarth Iron Pvt. Ltd. [2010 (260) ELT 514 (All.)] Further, the Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of Kishan Chand Chellaram [1980 (SUPP) SCC 660] has held that it is for the Department to produce the persons on whose evidence they are relying upon for cross-examination. 12. Admittedly, the matter was remanded by the Tribunal for allowing the cross-examination of the said input suppliers, who have given inculpatory statement during the course of investigation. Such directions of the Tribunal were binding on the commissioner. We agree with the ld. Advocate that in as much as it was the Revenue, who have relied upon the said statements, it was for them to produce the deponents for cross-examination. No responsibility can be fixed upon the appellants to ensure the presence of the input suppliers for the purpose of cross-examination. We also find that the observations and findings given by the adjudicating authority regarding the cross-examination of the input sup....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o blank cheque books were recovered from the appellants factory during the course of search. No enquiries were conducted from the concerned bank so as to corroborate the statements of the said traders. 16. Actually, we find that there are letters dated 03.04.1995 written by Shri ________________ and Shri Upendra ________, Sub Manger of Corporation Bank and Shri GC Viswanathan of the said bank to the Assessing Officer, Income Tax Department accusing the income tax authorities putting pressure upon them to implicate the appellant. They in their said letters categorically stated that Shri BK Modi, Chairman of the appellant company never gave any introduction to anybody to open any account and never deposited any money in the said account. They further wrote in the said letter that Assessing Officer, Income Tax was pressurising the bank to give evidence against the appellant and to say that they have given introduction to 5 to 6 accounts. The said communication by the officers of the bank is important in as much as the present case of the Revenue is primarily based upon the evidences collected by the Income Tax authorities. The said letters have been taken note of by the ITAT while d....