2017 (4) TMI 1618 - HC - Central Excise

Maintainability of appeal - substantial question of law is arising for decision or not - Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - HELD THAT - Adverting to the impugned order of CESTAT, it can be seen that the Tribunal adverted to and considered all relevant facts and factors including the evidentiary value of the materials which were allegedly seized from the premises of the assessee. The Appellate Commissioner had also decided in favour of the assessee. The Tribunal noted that the Appellate Commissioner was justified in holding that the entire case of the Revenue is based on the recovery of certain loose sheets as also private register, which cannot be held to be sufficient evidence - The learned Tribunal did not find any way to interfere with the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). It was also noted by the Tribunal that the entire case of the Revenue was based upon recovery of some so-called incriminating documents without any corroboration from independent sources. No ground is made out to interfere with the order of the Tribunal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - appeal dismissed.

Summary

The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed an appeal against the order of CESTAT under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal found that the Revenue's case lacked sufficient evidence and did not interfere with the findings of the Appellate Commissioner. The appeal was dismissed in limine.