2003 (7) TMI 168 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Appeal against order confirming demand of duty and imposing personal penalty.

Summary:
The Revenue filed an appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs (Appeals), Shillong, setting aside the order confirming demand of duty and penalty. The case involved allegations of clearing higher grades of Veneer as inferior grades to evade duty. Statements of the Chief Executive and Managing Director were recorded during investigations.

The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that there was no evidence of extra realization by the assessee from clients, and the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand based on inferences without solid evidence. The Revenue contended that the deposit made by the assessee during investigations indicated guilt, but the Tribunal found this insufficient to establish wrongdoing.

The Tribunal noted the lack of concrete evidence to prove the alleged clandestine removal of premium grade Veneer. Emphasizing the need for affirmative evidence in serious charges like clandestine removal, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal as the decision was based on inferences rather than solid proof.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)' decision to set aside the order confirming duty demand and penalty, highlighting the importance of substantial evidence in proving serious charges like clandestine removal.