2019 (3) TMI 1526

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Tribunal. In the earlier round, this Tribunal has remanded the matter to the original adjudicating authority making following observation:- "3. We find that the evidence as regards the forged nature of the licence was never supplied to the assessee irrespective of a prayer being made by them. As such, the question here is not as to whether the licences were actually forged or not but whether the lower authorities have followed the principles of natural justice or not. Admittedly, such evidences were never disclosed to the appellant at any point of time at the original proceedings or first appellate proceedings. Thus, we are of the view that the appellant have right to see such evidence and place their defence accordingly. Production of su....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e officers of the DGFT, who had issued these letters. The denovo order was passed by the original adjudicating authority after analyzing the evidences available on record. Aggrieved by the said order, they filed an appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals). Also, before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), although various opportunities were accorded to the appellants, they failed to appear and advance their case. Consequently, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) also decided the issue on the basis of evidences available on record. 3. Assailing the impugned order, the learned Advocate submits that even though they have requested cross-examination of the officers, who issued the letters dated 08.02.2001 and 27.08.2001, but the same was....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the officers, who issued the letter in exercise of their public authority, cannot be considered as violation of principles of natural justice. To support her contentions, she relies on the judgment of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Manidhari Stainless Wire Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India - 2018 (360) ELT 255 (AP). 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. As referred to above, while remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority, this Tribunal vide order dated 19.2.2009 prescribed a period of four months from the date of order to complete the de novo proceeding. Also, the appellants were directed not to seek unnecessarily adjournment and to file reply within one month from the date of receipt of the documents....