2005 (6) TMI 11

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....taken up in absence of the appellant. Heard ld. JDR. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of MS products and availing the benefit of Modvat credit under Rule 57 of Central Excise Rules. The appellant received certain inputs i.e. MS scrap from M/s. Mahabir Prasad & Co. On verification by the Revenue, it was found that M/s. Mahabir Prasad & Co. only ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on the statement of Shri Anil Kumar Gupta and Shri Mahesh Sharma of M/s. Mahabir Prasad & Co. and the appellants were not allowed to cross-examine these witnesses. The contention is that the statements were re corded at the back of the appellant, therefore, the findings recorded relying the statement without allowing cross-examination are not sustainable. The contention of the appellant is also th....