AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 1077
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. The brief facts are that the appellant Sandeep Manufacturing Strips (SMS for short), located at Ghaziabad a proprietorship concern of Shri Sandeep Gupta, registered with the Department and engaged in manufacture and clearance of copper wire, strips etc. appeared to be resorting to clandestine activity by way of unaccounted procurement of raw material, that is copper ingots from the factories of different suppliers/appellants herein namely Mayank Metals, Shivam Metals and Vasudev Udyog. The raw materials so procured was used by SMS for unaccounted manufacture of finished goods that is copper wire and strips in his factory and later removed in a clandestine manner to his shop namely Sandeep Metals Supply situated at Chawdi Bazar, Delhi-6 for retail sale in the market to other buyers. Consequently searches were conducted at various places that included all the manufacturing premises of the persons referred hereinabove, Pursuant to the investigations and enquiries, show cause notice was issued by the DGCI, Delhi Zonal Unit, Delhi both dated 18.04.2012 for demand and recovery of Rs. 6,71,05,300/- from SMS towards clandestinely manufacture and surreptitious supply of copper wire and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct and the principles of Natural Justice and as such fit to be set aside. The learned counsel further points out that initially at the stay stage this Tribunal had directed the appellants herein to deposit 50% of the adjudicated duty against which being aggrieved, the appellant had moved the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in C.E.A. No. 131 of 2015 and wherein with the leave of the Hon'ble High Court they had brought the entire order sheet from the file of learned Commissioner in respect of the present impugned order on record. On going through the said record of personal hearing, we find and from the noting in the file, we notice-that on 31/12/2013 it is recorded that request for cross examination of the following persons was made namely (i) Mohd. Israr, (ii) Balram Srivastava, (iii) Subodh Gupta, (iv) Shri Anil Kumar and (v) Arvind Kumar as per interim reply and letter given dated 22/11/2013. Further, order sheet states that defence replies/interim reply have been received from Sandeep Manufacturing Strips, Mayank Metals, Shivam Metals, and Vasudev Udyog. Further, states that the file is put up with comments that the letters for personal hearing to Shivam Metals and Mayank M....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ive evidence. The said persons-co-noticees if wish to be cross-examined may appear for that purpose on the date fixed in this regard. Further, observed since the remaining five persons namely Mohd. Israr, Anil Kumar Driver, Balram Srivastava, Yogesh Chandra Shukla and Gopal driver are not the co-noticees the request in this regard is allowed and some dates of personal hearing as mentioned against the name of the persons for cross-examination along with time fixed was given with the direction to convey the same to the concerned persons. It is observed by us that the date for cross-examination was fixed on 19,20/03/2014. Thereafter as per order sheet dated 21^st of March- letter for cross-examination and PH as mentioned above placed opposite for perusal and signature. Thereafter there is no further record of any cross-examination. The order sheet dated 21.03.2014 further states that another opportunity of cross examination as requested the by noticees/appellants is granted on 28.03.2014 at 11:30 and a 16:00 hours. "Please issue notices". Thereafter the order sheet shows recording of findings by the learned Commissioner dated 30.05.2014 resulting into the present impugned order. The l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er directing the appellants to make a pre-deposit of 30% of the duty. The learned counsel also pointed out to some correspondence namely letter dated 07.04.2014 written by Ashish Bansal, Advocate on behalf of Mayank Metals and Vasudev Udyog stating that the authority had allowed the cross examination of the persons as requested by the noticees. Accordingly, the counsel of the noticee's appeared alongwith the proprietors and authorized signatory of the noticee's on the scheduled date and time i.e. 19.03.2014 and 28.03.2014. However, following persons did not present for their cross examination namely. (i) Shri Yogesh Chandra Shukla, (ii) Anil Kumar, (iii) Subodh Gupta (iv) Mohd. Israr and; (v) Balram Srivastava. Further, request was made to call the remaining persons in the process of cross examination and on conclusion of the same to file their final reply to the show cause notices. Another request letter dated 15.05.2014 also appeared to be filed on same date as per the acknowledgement on the copy filed before us wherein also Mr. Ashish Bansal, Advocate stated that Shri Jai Bhagwan have prayed for cross examination of persons whose statements had been relied against them. Howe....