9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (6) TMI 260X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... one pocket diary from Shri Shyam Sunder Daga, the authorised signatory of the appellants. This diary contained date wise details of product on of marble slabs for the period 1-10-1992 to 21-11-1992. The notings in the diary revealed that the actual production of the marble slabs was being recorded in the said pocked diary and that only that quantity was being recorded in RG-1 register which the appellants wanted and not the entire production as was recorded in the pocket diary . The officers after comparing the production recorded in the pocket diary with the production recorded in RG-1 register found that 6051.480 sq. meters of marble slabs involving Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 73,072/- were not recorded in RG-1 register. Shri Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the appellants submitted that the said diary had nothing to do with the marble slabs manufactured and cleared from their factory; that Shri S.S Daga had admitted that the diary contained his own account of dressing the marble blocks supplied to him by the customers on job charges; that the diary does not contain the name of their factory; that the factory stamp was put by the inspector at the time of recovery of the diary; that the statements of S/Shri S.S. Daga and M.L. Daga do not show the full production; that no corroborative evidence was collected in respect of alleged excess production and clearance of marble slabs; that no evidence has been brought on record that the excess raw material was received by the appellants so that is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d under duress. The ld. DR submitted that this complaint cannot be equated to a retraction; that the statements are to be read with pocket diary recovered from Shri S.S. Daga, the authorised signatory of the appellants. The ld. DR, therefore, submitted that suppression of production and its clandestine removal is established and therefore, the lower authorities have rightly confirmed the demand for duty and imposition of penalty. 6. Heard the submissions of both sides, perused the case records, On careful consideration of the entire evidence on record, I find that the appellants have relied upon two points . One point that they diary did not belong to the accounts of the appellants and the second point is that the statements Shri S.S. Da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he statement of Shri S.S. Daga was fully confirmed by Shri M.L. Daga and hence it can be concluded that the diary recorded the correct entries of the marble slabs manufactured by the appellants. 9. Now, let us examine the statements of Shri S.S. Daga and Shri M.L. Daga. Both these persons identified the pocket dairy and stated that the diary showed the production and clearance of marble slabs of the appellants . These statements are voluntary and also true to explain the entries in the diary. 10. In view of the above discussions, it is proved beyond any doubt that the appellants had suppressed the production and did not record it in RG-1 register and removed this excess production without payment of duty. In this view of the matter and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
