COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, LUCKNOW Vs. SHYAM TRADERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Pankaj Bhatia who has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent. This Central Excise Appeal under Sec. 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 arises out of an order dated 12th August, 2011 passed by Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal [ : 2012 (278) E.L.T. 468 (Tribunal)], whereby, the matter has been remanded back to the adjudicating authority for allowing the respondent to cross -examine the witnesses. From a perusal of the impugned judgment, we find that such a requirement of law being imperative as was held by this Court in a judgment reported in : 2010 (260) E.L.T. 514 (All.), CCE, Meerut -I v/s. Parmarth Iron Pvt. Ltd. was appreciated and applied by the Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant does not dispute the position that the law laid down by this Court in the judgment mentioned above remains unsettled and the opportunity of cross -examining witnesses is available to the assessee.

(3.) In support of the contention based on the judgment referred to above, learned counsel for the respondent has further placed before us a judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries v/s. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata -II reported in : 2015 (324) E.L.T. 641 (S.C).