9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (4) TMI 670X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Ld. Counsel Shri A.K. Jain for the appellants submits that the entire case of the Department is built on the information contained in the five Notebooks resumed by the officers of Anti-Evasion Directorate of the Department on 6-10-94 from the ground floor of A-32 Wazirpur Industrial Area, Delhi. This was sought to be corroborated by the Department by statements given by Shri B.K. Arya, who, the Department claims, was earlier an employee of the appellants, which is disputed by the appellants. 3. The show cause notice issued to the appellants dated 21-6-95 relates to the manufacture and clearances of stainless steel flats from their factory at Murthal, Haryana and clearance thereof by truck owned by the appellants to their depot at the aforementioned premises at Wazirpur Industrial Area, Delhi without payment of duty, and for further despatch of the said consignments to various other places by appellants transporters, namely, M/s. Singhal Carrier Corpn. and Ramakrishnan Carrier Corpn. Reliance was also placed on the statements given by Shri Chatur Singh, General Manager (Admn.) of the appellants. Statements given by Shri B.K. Arya relating to various entries in the Notebooks wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion reports/slips submitted by the appellants. The aforesaid material which supported the appellants' defence and which would have established the unsustainable nature of the allegations had been completely ignored by the adjudicting authority, thus making the impugned order unsustainable on the ground of non-application of mind. 6. In support of his contention that entries in private diaries cannot be made the sole basis for upholding the charge of clandestine manufacture/removal, Counsel relied on the following case laws : 1. Kashmir Vanaspati (P) Ltd. v CCE [1989 (39) E.L.T. 655 (T)] 2. Shakti Chemical Industries v. CCE, Baroda [1995 (76) E.L.T. 410 (T)] 3. V.K. Thampy v. CCE, Kochi [1994 (69) E.L.T. 300 (T)] 4. Gurpreet Rubber Industries v. CCE, Chandigarh [1996 (82) E.L.T. 347 (T) 7. He relied on the following cases in support of the contention that where the adjudicating authority does not deal with the submissions made by a party during the adjudication proceedings the resultant order should be taken to mean that the adjudicating authority has accepted these submissions. 1. Commissioner of Income-Tax Patiala II v. Jagadhri Electric Supply Industrial Co. [198 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1. Ld. SDR Shri Mewa Singh defending the impugned order referred to para 11 of the impugned order where detailed findings have been recorded by the Commissioner on all the contentions of the appellants. As regards the contention that the appellants were not concerned with the premises at A32 Wazirpur Industrial Area, Delhi, the Commissioner had referred to gate passes issued from the appellant s factory at Haryana stating that the goods were transhipped at A32 Wazirpur Industrial Area, Delhi. If the said premises had no connection with the appellants, there was no need for the gate passes to show the said premises as the destination point for the goods. Further, the General Manager Shri Chatur Singh had in his statement dated 15-12-94 admitted that the appellants had kept Shri B.K. Arya as a clerk in Delhi to look after the receipt of the documents and shifting of the goods from the Company's trucks. Trucks of the transporters as well as Shri B.K. Arya were operating from the same premises, A32 Wazirpur Industrial Area. As regards the contention of the appellants that Wazirpur Industrial Area consisted of a big complex where a number of transactions, like purchase and sale of steel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ea. The Commissioner had also found that the explanation given by Shri B.K. Arya who was a former employee of the appellants explaining the entries in the five note books was a direct evidence which fully supported the allegation of clandestine removal. The statments given by Shri Chatur Singh, General Manager of the appellants on 6-10-94 clearly admitted that the appellants used to despatch their stainless steel flats from their factory at Haryana to Wazirpur Industrial Area in Delhi. Shri B.K. Arya was admittedly the appellants' clerk at the relevant time having his office at A32 Wazirpur Industrial Area. Irrespective of the question whether the said premises belonged to the appellants or to someone else, there was no reason to doubt that the appellants' employee, Shri B.K. Arya who looked after the receipt of the stainless steel flats from the factory and their further dispatch to various purchasers, functioned from the aforesaid premises and the entries shown in the five notebooks relate to the clearances of a large quantity of stainless steel flats without payment of duty. Since the initial statement given by Shri B.K. Arya was a voluntary statement and since it was a detailed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
