9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (1) TMI 558X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts could not produce any duty paying documents i.e. invoices issued by the processors evidencing payment of Central Excise duty. The seizure was made under the reasonable belief that the said goods were offending goods, liable for confiscation. In the subsequent adjudication it was held that the proprietor had admitted to have got the grey fabrics processed from certain processors and no duty was paid on such processed fabrics and there are no, back-ups of any bills and invoices or duty paying documents. 3. On this thin and flimsy evidence the adjudication proceedings culminated in confiscation of seized fabrics, imposition of redemption fine and various penalties on the respondents. These were set aside on appeal. Hence the instant appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly considered the finding of the JAC, I cannot agree with him that the silence on the part of M/s. Angan Prints to disclose the actual processors name would visit them with a charge; it can only lead to strong presumption or suspicion about the conduct but not enough to bring home the fact that goods were processed in the jurisdiction of the JAC. (b) There is no provision in the Central Excise Law transferring the onus on to the purchaser to prove the licit duty paid possession of the material like Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962. The onus is on the investigation and the officers to determine when and where the goods were processed and how they reached the premises where they were seized. When in the 2nd para of the OIO it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... they cause the manufacture of the goods. And in para 30B the purpose of the declarations under Rule 174A was recorded. When processor has been held to be the manufacturer, duty liability is to be on the processor and not the trader (i.e. the raw material supplier or recipient of the processed fabrics) as it being made out in the impugned OIO here. This liability cannot be discharged by any one else voluntarily or otherwise. Therefore the actual processor is to be located and the fabrics have to be proved to be non-duty paid. Being bound to follow the law as laid by the Supreme Court, I cannot accept duty from anybody else and/or hold the firm liable for payment of duty which the law does not permit. Any such payments made cannot be du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
