Oriental Veneers Products Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Oriental Veneers Products Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jun 11, 2004

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/35621

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/35621
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: J Balasundaram, A M Moheb
Decided On: Jun 11, 2004
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Oriental Veneers Products Ltd.

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Excerpt

.....for the same; the request for cross-examination of customers confirming receipt of goods without payment of duty has not been granted and no reasons for rejecting the request made has been recorded; no details are furnished as to who are the five customers who corroborated the payment to the managing director of the company for receipt of veneers.3. the commissioner has also not given any detailed finding as to why he had held that only rs. 24,42,919/- have been received by the company's managing director as payment for goods cleared clandestinely even though the deposits made by the managing director and supported by way of paying slips amounted to rs. 1,98,52,332/-. the commissioner's order is rather cryptic. we therefore set aside the same for the above reasons and remand the case to the jurisdictional commissioner for fresh decision in accordance with law after supply of relied upon documents requested by the assessees in their reply to the show cause notice and after considering their request for cross- examination.fresh order shall be passed after extending reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellants, within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of this order.

Full Judgment

1. Against the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai confirming duty demand of Rs. 4,88,584/- (out of the total demand of Rs. 39,93,852/- raised in the show cause notice), imposing penalty of equal amount on the company and Rs. 3 lakhs on its Managing Director and confiscating seized goods with option to redeem on payment of fine, the assessee company and its Managing Director, as well as the Revenue has preferred the above appeals. The assessee is aggrieved by the confirmation of duty demand, imposition of penalties and order of confiscation while the Revenue is aggrieved by the dropping of the balance demand of Rs. 35,05,268/-.

2. We have heard both sides. The basic grievance of the assessee is that of violation of the principles of natural justice. The appellants have not been supplied with copies of some of the documents relied upon in the show cause notice in spite of repeated request for the same; the request for cross-examination of customers confirming receipt of goods without payment of duty has not been granted and no reasons for rejecting the request made has been recorded; no details are furnished as to who are the five customers who corroborated the payment to the Managing Director of the Company for receipt of veneers.

3. The Commissioner has also not given any detailed finding as to why he had held that only Rs. 24,42,919/- have been received by the company's Managing Director as payment for goods cleared clandestinely even though the deposits made by the Managing Director and supported by way of paying slips amounted to Rs. 1,98,52,332/-. The Commissioner's order is rather cryptic. We therefore set aside the same for the above reasons and remand the case to the jurisdictional Commissioner for fresh decision in accordance with law after supply of relied upon documents requested by the assessees in their reply to the show cause notice and after considering their request for cross- examination.

Fresh order shall be passed after extending reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellants, within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of this order.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Oriental Veneers Products Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge J Balasundaram, A M Moheb