NIRMAL SEEDS PVT. LTD. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. The respondents waive service. By consent, rule is made returnable forthwith and the petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal.

(2.) The petitioners are a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. They are engaged, inter alia, in the manufacture of products which are styled as eco-friendly products. The description of the same is provided in Para 4.1 of the petition. Then it is stated that their final products in two forms, namely, liquid form and powder/granule form are applied for seed treatment and/or soil application and/or foliage application. The petitioners have described how these final products are obtained. We are least concerned with that for the simple reason that the petitioners' offices were visited by the Preventive Cell/Wing of the Central Excise, Nashik-I Commissionerate, Nashik. During the course of the search, the Revenue discovered that these are excisable goods. The petitioners manufacture them and, therefore, they are liable to pay excise duty. Relying upon the materials obtained during the search and also the statements of the officers/employees of the petitioners, a show cause notice, dated 16-9-2016 (Exhibit-C) was issued and alleging that there is duty evasion in the sum mentioned therein.

(3.) The petitioners, during the course of the proceedings and pursuant to this show cause notice to which they submitted a detailed reply, addressed a communication dated 23-11-2016 requesting the second respondent to permit cross-examination of the persons mentioned in the said communication. These are not the persons related to the petitioners' establishment but they are the employees of the distributors of the petitioners. Their statements have been expressly relied upon in the show cause notice, dated 16-9-2016, to allege that the petitioners are engaged in the manufacture of products which are sold as insecticides and plant growth stimulant/plant growth regulators. The petitioners while denying that the statements of the employees of these distributors can be used against them, specifically contended that they are not experts. Therefore, on the strength of their version no proceedings can lie and alleging the evasion of central excise duty. All the more, therefore, it is necessary to cross-examine them.