9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (2) TMI 191X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been allegedly sending semi-finished steering wheels to one of the job workers, namely PPAI for finishing after carrying out two tests before the goods became marketable. Those two processes are (1) reaming process and (2) run out testing. These were sent out because it was alleged by the appellants that they did not have the facility for these two tests. Department in the course of investigation found on the basis of several statements and several challans and other records that PPAI was closed, that the goods so sent to PPAI were actually finished goods and it was only in the garb of semi- finished goods, that they were cleared without payment of duty. The goods sent to PPAI were actually for the market in Kashmiri Gate, Delhi. It was, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erations. He submits that this finding of the adjudicating authority is not correct because PPAI was only closed for a short period in the middle of August, 1995 when the officers visited the premises. It does not mean that PPAI was closed throughout the relevant period i.e. April, 1992 to Sept. 1995. No enquiry has been made from any responsible person of PPAI. He further submits that even when the goods were being sent to PPAI during the closure period of their unit, PPAI was getting the goods finished from another unit, M/s. Coolwells. Learned Advocate, therefore, submits that the conclusion drawn by the adjudicating authority that no finishing operations were carried out by PPAI during the relevant period is not correct on the basis of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... work, sent by the appellants to various job workers of 57F(3) challans. There is absolutely no finding, submits the learned Advocate, on the said statements and the said reply submitted by the appellants. 4. We have carefully considered the pleas advanced from both sides. We observe that department is not denying that a large number of 57F(3) challans have been issued not only to PPAI but to others as well. Five job workers to whom the job work for carrying out the same two operations, namely, reaming process and run out testing were also carried out by those five workers. A very clear plea was taken by the appellants before the adjudicating authority that no enquiry whatsoever had been made by the Excise Officers whether those five job ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 95 cannot be arrived on the basis of the evidence on record. We find great force in the plea of the appellants that had they been having any processing facility, there was no need to send the goods to other five job workers. This plea has not been dealt with by recording any statement from the concerned five job workers. This has been brushed aside by the adjudicating authority on the ground that the appellants had not been able to produce any cogent evidence that they had been receiving back finished goods. This finding to our mind has not been approached correctly by the adjudicating authority because instead of placing the burden on the department to prove their case it places the burden on the party to prove the reverse. Accordingly, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
