LAWS(CAL)-2017-6-61

RAJ KUMAR KEDIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On June 22, 2017
RAJ KUMAR KEDIA Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two orders passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) are under challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had suffered a show cause notice. The petitioner had replied thereto. The proceeding was taken up for consideration by an Adjudicating Officer. According to the petitioner, the Adjudicating Officer had acted in breach of the principles of natural justice. Moreover, the petitioner was not allowed to cross-examination in the prosecution witness. The Adjudicating Officer had passed an order. An appeal was carried against such order. At the time of admission of the appeal, the authorized representative appearing on behalf of the petitioner had offered to deposit a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs as a pre-condition for the consideration of the appeal. However, CESTAT had recorded that the authorized representative of the petitioner had offered Rs. 50 lakhs. It is an erroneous recording. The petitioner had applied for correction of such erroneous recording. Such application was dismissed by one of the impugned order dated August 11, 2016. Referring to the other impugned order passed by CESTAT dated January 14, 2016, learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that, while CESTAT had remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for the purpose of final adjudication in view of the Adjudicating Authority not having allowed the petitioner the right of cross-examination of the prosecution witness, it had proceeded to impose a pre-condition of a deposit of Rs. 50 lakhs. He submits that, since the quantum is yet to be adjudicated at any stage, the question of pre-deposit of an unadjudicated quantum does not arise.

(3.) The department is represented.