2026 (7) TMI 915

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....40352 of 2018, Excise Appeal No. 40353 of 2018, Excise Appeal No. 42025 of 2016 And Excise Appeal No. 41449 of 2018 - Final Order Nos. 40875 - 40881/2026<br>Central Excise<br>Hon'ble Mr. P. Dinesha, Member (Judicial) And Hon'ble Mr. M. Ajit Kumar, Member (Technical) For the Appellant : Shri Derrick Sam & Ms. Sangeetha M., Advocates (S.No.1) Ms. Ieswarya. N., Advocate (S. No. 2) Shri M. Karthikeyan, Advocate (Sl.Nos.3,4,5) Shri S. Rajagopalan & Shri R. Balachandar, Advocates (Sl. Nos.6,7) For the Respondent : Shri Sanjay Kakkar, Authorized Representative ORDER PER: SHRI P. DINESHA : These Appeals arise out of the common impugned Order-in-Original No. 50/2016 dated 12.07.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirune....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....amination of C.E.O, apart from explaining the day-today activities of the firm and the persons whose statements were recorded. 4. When such a reply was received, the Adjudicating Authority having felt that there was no need to grant an opportunity to cross-examine any of the persons, proceeded to decide the case on merits, as can be seen from paragraph 11.01 of the impugned order and, vide impugned Order-in-Original No. 50/2016 dated 12.07.2016, he has confirmed the duty demand/reversal of cenvat credit with interest as proposed in the SCN and imposed penalty. Seriously aggrieved by the above demand, penalty, etc., the present Appeals have been filed before this forum. 5. Heard Shri Derrick Sam and Ms. Sangeetha, Ld. Advocate/s for th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s were never retracted and no evidence regarding duress, coercion etc. has been placed on record. He has also in this regard relied on the following decisions : (i) N.S. Mahesh Vs CC Cochin [2016 (331) ELT 402 (Ker)] (ii) Jagdish Shanker Trivedi Vs CC Kanpur [2006 (194) ELT 290 (Tribunal)] (iii) Ahmednaar Rollin Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCE Aurangabad [2014 (300) ELT 119 (Tri.-Mum)] 8. We have carefully read the decisions / orders referred to in the impugned order (supra) and we have no two opinions about the law as laid down therein. 9. Having held that there was no need to grant any permission for cross-examination upon receipt of what was termed by him as 'interim reply', [para 08.01 of Order-in-Original] nothi....