2012 (5) TMI 518 - AT - Central Excise

Duty demand - Clandestine removal of goods - Revenue contends that weighment slips were not matching with any of the invoices issued by the appellants - Held that - There is no inculpatory statement of any person supporting the stand of Revenue. It is well settled that in the absence of any corroboration the entire case of the clandestine removal cannot be made on the basis of weighment slips. The charges of clandestine activities are required to be upheld on the basis of affirmative and tangible evidence. The presence of weighment slips, at the most, may lead to some doubt on the assessees activities but cannot take the place of legal evidence so as to confirm the demand against them - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) by Revenue
- Confirmation of demand based on weighment slips
- Lack of corroborative evidence in the case

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi involved an appeal by the Revenue against an order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Revenue sought confirmation of a demand against the respondents based on weighment slips recovered from their premises. The original adjudicating authority had confirmed a part of the demand on this basis. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside this confirmation citing lack of evidence indicating the removal of goods, no investigation at the buyer's end, and no recorded statement of the driver.

The learned AR for the Revenue pointed out discrepancies between the weighment slips and the invoices issued by the appellants. Although the number of bundles matched in some cases, the weight recorded in the invoices was significantly less than that on the weighment slips, suggesting non-payment of duty on the differential weight. The Revenue primarily relied on the weighment slips, but the Tribunal emphasized the need for corroborative evidence in cases of clandestine activities. It was highlighted that the presence of weighment slips could raise doubts but could not substitute legal evidence to confirm the demand.

Ultimately, the Tribunal found no infirmity in the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order and rejected the Revenue's appeal. The judgment underscored the importance of tangible and affirmative evidence in cases involving allegations of clandestine activities, emphasizing that weighment slips alone were insufficient to establish the charges. The decision highlighted the necessity for robust corroborative evidence to support claims of wrongdoing and confirmed that mere presence of weighment slips could not conclusively prove the allegations.