2018 (9) TMI 4

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pondent ORDER 1. Shri Vinayak Kasturchand Kangaonkar, proprietor of M/s Shreyas Enterprises, challenges imposition of penalty of Rs. 17,17,664/- under rule 26 (2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002, in order-in-appeal No.NGP/EXCUS/000/APPL/524/16-17 dated 11/01/2017 of Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Nagpur, which also confirmed recovery of like amount from the main noticee, M/s Rutuja ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....horised Representative. 4. On perusal of impugned order of the lower authorities, it is seen that the original authority specifically discarded the request for cross examination on the ground that these were not relied upon as documents and statements. It is settled law that the evidence of deposition of the witnesses must be subject to proof during the adjudication proceedings. It would theref....