2017 (3) TMI 1571 - AT - Central Excise

Clandestine removal - mode of transport was bogus and fake documents were created to cause prejudice to Revenue - whether there was actual manufacture of the goods cotton cone/cheese yarn made by the appellant when there were evidences on record to show that mode of transport used were false and described vehicles were not registered with the Transport Authority? - Held that - When the appellate Commissioner found that there were falsification of records and appellant has no material to discard the allegation of Revenue he held that there was clandestine clearance of the goods and there was neither any job working done nor any job worked goods cleared. We are not able to find any material from the grounds of appeal of the appellant to disturb such finding of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Dispute over actual manufacture of cotton cone/cheese yarn, falsification of transport records, job working, clandestine clearance of goods.

Analysis:
The primary issue in this case revolved around determining whether the appellant had actually manufactured cotton cone/cheese yarn or engaged in clandestine activities. The Commissioner (Appeals) examined evidence indicating falsification of transport records, such as the use of unregistered vehicles and lack of raw material sent to job workers for conversion. It was found that no job working had occurred, and goods were potentially cleared under false pretenses. The Commissioner highlighted discrepancies, like the absence of labor bills and freight charges, to support the conclusion of bogus transactions.

The appellate Commissioner upheld the decision, noting the lack of material from the appellant to refute the Revenue's allegations. The dismissal of the appeal was based on the Commissioner's findings of falsified records and clandestine clearance without any evidence of job working or legitimate clearance of goods. The appellant failed to provide grounds to challenge these conclusions, leading to the appeal's rejection.

In considering the case, the Tribunal referenced judgments from various High Courts, including Punjab and Haryana, Madras, and Himachal Pradesh. These references underscored the importance of not granting relief to evaders, emphasizing the need to deter fraudulent practices. The Tribunal's decision aligned with the legal principles established in previous cases, emphasizing the significance of upholding tax compliance and preventing undue advantages for those engaging in illicit activities.