1993 (7) TMI 184 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
The issues involved in the judgment are the alleged clandestine removal of excisable goods without pre-determination and pre-payment of Central Excise duty, discrepancies in records, and the authenticity of private records leading to the evasion of Central Excise duty.

Clandestine Removal of Excisable Goods:
The case involved allegations against the party for manufacturing and removing wires and cables without pre-determination and pre-payment of Central Excise duty. The party claimed that they were victims of forged accounts and false evidence created by disgruntled employees. The adjudicating authority found the charges established, but there were discrepancies regarding the stolen nature of goods and the lack of findings on the removal of excisable goods.

Discrepancies in Records:
The party contested the charges based on discrepancies in records and the calculation of duty liability. The appellant argued that rejected goods were treated as dutiable, and there was no consideration of the duty liability under relevant notifications. The appellant relied on legal precedents to support their arguments.

Authenticity of Private Records:
The genuineness and authenticity of private records were challenged by the party, alleging manipulation by mischievous workers and police involvement. The adjudicating authority dismissed these claims as a hypothetical defense without addressing the evidence presented by the appellant. The tribunal emphasized the need for tangible evidence to establish charges of evasion of Central Excise duty.

Conclusion:
After a thorough review of the case, the tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, citing the lack of concrete evidence and discrepancies in the adjudication process. The judgment highlighted the importance of substantiated findings and proper consideration of evidence in cases involving allegations of evasion of Central Excise duty.