ORDER
M.P. Bohra, Member (J)
1. Heard Shri H.V. Ghirnikar, Consultant for Appellant and Shri J.R. Madhiam, JDR for Respondent. Learned Consultant submits that in present case, the copies of the Rly. Receipt on which the demand has been raised for not supply to the appellants. He submits that the appellant repeatedly requested the Addl. Commissioner to supply the copies of Railway receipts to the Assistant Commissioner who did not accept to their request rather directed to obtain copies from Rly. Authorities. He submits that the basis of notice was the Rly. Receipts. The abstract copy of register of the Rly. Receipts has been supplied which is a secondary evidence and not admissible. Therefore, he submits that the authority below may kindly be directed to supply the relevant record. In reply, learned JDR submits that the sufficient opportunity was given to appellant to collect the record but they failed to obtain the record nor they appeared before adjudicating authority. Hence the proceedings were concluded.
2. In present case, the demand has been raised on the basis of the goods (Bidis) were booked by Laxman Munda at Sambalpur Rly. Station. The investigations reveal that the balance qty. of 2,14,40,000 No. of Bidis were removed without payment of Central Excise Duty on the basis of Rly. Receipts. However, copies of Rly. Receipts were not supplied by Adjudication Authority alongwith show cause notice. Only the abstract copy of register of Rly. receipts has been supplied. The abstract copy of the Rly. Receipts recorded in a register is not the primary evidence. In present case the total demand is based on the Rly. Receipts which is a primary document and in the absence of such, the demand is not sustainable. Even the Assistant Commissioner had also realised the importance of the Rly. Receipts and that’s why he directed the appellant vide his office letter No. C. No. V (2415/ADJN/18/92/32694A), dated 23-9-1996 to collect the said Rly. Receipts from the Rly. Authorities.
3. In view of above discussion, I set aside the order-in-appeal and order-in-original and remand the case to the adjudicating authority with the direction to supply the relevant documents and decide afresh after affording of opportunity of hearing to both the parties.