9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (9) TMI 205X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed in appeal No. E/2864/87-NRB to the Hon ble High Court of Delhi. 1. Whether averments made in a plaint filed in a Civil Court by a litigant for damages against a Bank in a matter having no connection with the levy or payment of excise duty could constitute conclusive evidence in adjudication proceedings under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944? 2. Whether such averments could at all be evidence even when the issues to the suit are still to be decided by the Civil Court, and the suit is pending? 3. Whether an averment contained in a plaint filed before a Civil Court which is pending could amount to an admission as defined in Section 17 20 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and fulfils the requirements of Sec. 21 ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evaded central excise duty to the tune of Rs. 10,31,772/-. These charges were concluded based upon the stock declaration given by the appellants to the Bank on 25-2-1985 and the stock taking report of the Bank officials since these figures were not reflected in RG-1 register maintained by the appellants. The contention of the party is that the figures given to the Bank were inflated stock figures with an intention to get more loan and same cannot be taken as basis for having manufactured that huge quantity. No additional machinery had been added and no extra raw material had been purchased during that period to arrive at the conclusion that they had manufactured more goods than they had been normally. Further the goods shown in the stock st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facture and removal of excisable goods. But on the facts and circumstances in the instant case it is for the appellants to substantiate that finished goods were purchased from the open market. Apart from not submitting documentary evidence of such huge purchases, they have not even disclosed the names of persons from whom the goods have been purchased. Hence the Department was justified in arriving at the conclusion of clandestine manufacture and removal of the goods based upon available material on record. Further the plaint presented by the appellants before Delhi High Court lends a strong assurance to conclusion already reached. On reference to a third Member in view of the difference of opinion between the two Members, the third Member ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refer the question to the High Court for its considered opinion. He also referred to the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Prem Jewellers, reported in 1990 (47) E.L.T. 624 wherein it was held that Tribunal is bound to refer any question of law that arises out of its order even though such a question is purely academic and not calculated to dispose of real issue between the parties. However, the High Court has the discretion to decline the answer to such a question but no such discretion is vested with the Tribunal to decline to refer a question of law arising out of its order. 6. On the other hand, Sri S.K. Sharma, learned JDR, appearing for the respondent, submitted that no point of law is involved i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
