2017 (12) TMI 219

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sent for the Respondent: Mr. G.R. Singh, D.R. ORDER Per: S.K. Mohanty This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 02.03.2017 passed by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Raipur, upholding the adjudged demand confirmed by the original authority. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the Officers of DGCEI, based on certain intelligence, conducted enquiry with refe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e was issued on 19.08.2015, which is beyond the normal period, as provided in Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. He further submits that the Department has confirmed the adjudged demand against the appellant based on the third party investigation and the appellant had not been provided with the opportunity to cross-examine the concerned persons involved in the activities of clandestine r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt as a manufacturer of excisable goods, did not inform the Department regarding procurement of goods from the alleged supplier M/s. Ambika Steel Pvt. Ltd. Since the Department investigated into the matter and gathered information from such supplier of M/s. Ambika Steel and thereafter issued show cause notice within the stipulated time frame of 5 years, the same in my considered view, is not barre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....king confirmation of the adjudged demand. Since the Central Excise Department never visited the factory of the appellant for further investigation and the specific request for cross-examination of the concerned persons/witnesses were turned down, though specifically prayed for in the reply to show cause notice, I am of the view that the principle of natural justice have been violated in this case.....