9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (12) TMI 473X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... corroboration regarding purchase of extra raw material or disposal of excess finished goods is unearthed. Therefore, we hold that the appeals of the Revenue on this point are devoid of merits. We have carefully examined the above grounds and we are unable to subscribe to the postulates to the effect that, where there is an evidence of partial evasion, conclusion must be drawn to hold that there has been clandestine clearance of 2,597 M.T. of finished goods as alleged in the show cause notice. This is so because, the Commissioner in his order has weighed the entire evidence on record, including all the probabilities before discarding the allegation of clandestine clearance. It has been exhaustively brought out in the findings recorded by the Commissioner that, mere existence of entries of clandestine production in the seized private record cannot be sufficient evidence to confirm the allegation of evasion. A corroboration is required to support this evidence with other material such as, evidence regarding procurement of corresponding raw material for obtaining the finished production allegedly concealed or the evidence regarding the disposal of this excess material. In the Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ped]. (D) Finished goods removal of 135.078 M.Ts. involving duty of Rs. 2,08,729/- against defective invoices, the duty payment of which cannot be co-related with the debit entry shown to establish the payment. Findings - (There is no irregularity hence there is no demand] (E) Clandestine removal of 260 M.Ts. of finished goods in the guise of agricultural equipments (Heading No. 84.32). The actual goods under removal being of flats/bars etc. (duty amounting to Rs. 3,28,790/-). Findings - (Demand for Rs. 3,28,790/- confirmed). (F) Clandestine removal of finished goods weighing 95.125 M.Ts. figuring in the loader's advices of the transporters. Findings - (Demand dropped). 2.3 The Commissioner in the adjudication order gave his findings on each of the afore-mentioned allegations the gist of which is extracted in the brackets below each allegation whereas in the Revenue's appeal only a few findings are under challenge, which are discussed individually. 3.1 A-Non-accountal of 289.335 MTs. of raw material - (i) The Commissioner on critical analysis of the evidence of raw material record maintained by the manufacturer, observed that, there was irregularity only in res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssioner that the entries in the said private record are of doubtful nature. The Commissioner's observations on this critical aspect of the case are reproduced herein below :- "Against the allegation that they have, during the period 1-3-1994 to 27-6-1994 manufactured a quantity of 2,597 MTs Flats/MS Square Bars, but have not accounted for them in RG-1 register and removed them without payment of duty of Rs. 43,77,344/-, the party No. 1 to 4 have denied that the private record belongs to them and the same has been seized by the department from their factory premises. They submitted that the Panchnama recorded on the day of the visit of the officers does not indicate as to where from the private record was recovered and from whose possession. I have critically examined the above private record vis-a-vis RG-1 Register and find that, the same (private records) does neither contain the name of the party to which it belongs nor contain any other evidence to indicate the nexus thereof with M/s. C.M. Re-rolling & Fabricator, Raipur, the party No. 1. The investigating officers have failed to adduce any evidence in this regard. Even it is not known as to in whose handwriting the entries in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te records and the entries of production shown therein with the party Nos. 1 to 4. Besides above the investigating officers have failed to adduce corroborative evidence either in regard to the source of procurement of raw materials used for such alleged suppressed production or for their clandestine removal leaving reasonable doubt and suspicion in regard to the authenticity and ownership of said private record and the entries made therein. Thus in respectful agreement of the various judicial pronouncements referred to above, I am constrained to hold that there is no relevancy of the said 'private record' with the party's factory and their manufacturing activity and accordingly charges contemplated in the show cause notice placing reliance to the said private record including demand and recovery of Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 43,77,344/- fails, having no legs to stand. Held accordingly." 5. So far as the issue regarding dropping of the demand of Rs. 43,77,344/- by the ld. Commissioner, in the revenue appeal, it has been urged that the Commissioner was in error in discarding the evidence unearthed through private record seized by the investigating team. The appeal mer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
