TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (6) TMI 951
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ued to the petitioner. 3] As against the aforesaid impugned orders, an appeal lies to the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) in terms of Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994. However, Mr. Raichandani, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that since the impugned orders have been made in breach of principles of natural justice, the bar of alternate remedy ought not to be made applicable and this Court should entertain the present petition against the impugned orders. 4] Mr. Raichandani, by way of elaboration submits that the impugned orders rely upon the statements of the employees of the petitioner recorded under Section 14 of the Central Excise....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etitioner had an alternate and efficacious remedy of an appeal and therefore, this Court may not interfere with the impugned order in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India. 7] Upon analysis of the record as well as the impugned orders, we find that the complaint of the petitioner is not that there was no compliance whatsoever with the principles of natural justice or fair play but rather, the complaint relates to insufficient compliance with such principles. The petitioner was issued a Show Cause Notice to which the petitioner has duly responded. Along with the Show Cause Notice, the material which was proposed to be relied against the petitioner was also furnished to the petitioner. The peti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of prejudice, if any, as also response to the same will essentially involve adjudication into factual aspects which exercise can be effectively undertaken in the course of appeal rather than in these proceedings. 10] The petitioner, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, has therefore not made out a case warranting the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, bypassing the alternate and efficacious remedy by way of an appeal before the Appellate Authority. The decision relied upon by the petitioner turn on their own peculiar facts and are therefore, distinguishable. 11] In M/s. Andaman Timber Industries (supra), the Apex Court was concerned with a situation where the Adju....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....entral Excise Act, 1944 and holds that cross-examination is to be permitted where the Adjudicating Authority proposes to admit statements in evidence in interests of justice. In the present case, the Adjudicating Authority has not based its decision solely upon the statements with regard to which cross-examination was applied for but the Adjudicating Authority has relied upon other materials/documents as well. 15] As noted earlier, this is not a case of "no opportunity" but at the highest the complaint relates to 'no adequate opportunity'. The petitioner will therefore, have to make out a case, not only of failure of natural justice but also a case of consequent prejudice. All this, will require examination and evaluation of fact....