Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (12) TMI 1726 - HC - Central ExciseClandestine removal by a benami firm - traded goods or not - HELD THAT - The matter is required to be remitted back to the Tribunal for re-consideration - We make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion on merits inasmuch as the Tribunal being last fact finding authority ought to have considered the facts in detail and discussed the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) and give its independent finding after considering the documents which are on record. The order of the Tribunal is quashed and set aside. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues:
Challenging Tribunal's decision on appeal by the assessee regarding excise duty on goods removed clandestinely through a Benami firm. Analysis: The appellant challenged the Tribunal's decision allowing the appeal filed by the assessee regarding the excise duty on goods removed clandestinely through a Benami firm. The High Court framed a substantial question of law questioning the correctness of the Tribunal's decision. The appellant contended that despite producing a complete paper book, the Tribunal summarily allowed the appeal in a cryptic manner. Upon reviewing the order of the CIT (A) and the Tribunal, it was observed that the Tribunal did not establish whether the goods cleared in the name of the company were manufactured by the company itself. The excise duty is payable by the manufacturer/producer of the goods, and the documents recovered did not prove the manufacturer's identity. The Tribunal noted that the show cause notice was based solely on the Income Tax Department without any investigation by the Central Excise Department. Consequently, the demands against the company for undervaluation and clandestine removal of goods were quashed, and the impugned order was set aside, with appeals allowed and consequential relief granted. However, the Commissioner, after detailed consideration of the evidence, made observations not reproduced for brevity. The High Court found that the Tribunal did not provide a detailed finding and remitted the matter back to the Tribunal for re-consideration. The High Court clarified that it was not expressing any opinion on the merits, emphasizing that the Tribunal, as the final fact-finding authority, should have considered the facts in detail. The Tribunal's order was quashed and set aside, instructing the Tribunal to reconsider the matter independently in accordance with the law. Therefore, the Tribunal was directed to reconsider the matter afresh, allowing it to take an independent view. The appeal was allowed, setting the stage for the Tribunal to review the case thoroughly and provide a detailed finding based on the evidence on record.
|