2005 (2) TMI 635

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t. [Order per : Moheb Ali M., Member (T)]. Heard both the sides. 2. On the basis of documents seized and the statements recorded, it was alleged that the appellant, M/s. Prestige Plastics Ltd., a manufacturer of Plastic Pipes, removed the said goods without payment of Central Excise duty. Such removals appeared to have been made during the period January 99 to September 99, the total d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t best surmises. He further stated that the worksheet showing the calculations of duty was never given to the appellants. It is also his contention that duty was demanded without giving permissible deductions on the amounts alleged to have been received by the appellants against clandestine sales. The price at which goods are sold are cum-duty prices and therefore proper deductions should have bee .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... als received after April 1st. The Department, he argued, was right in calculating the duty fore-gone keeping reliance on the facts as brought out by the person who maintained the diary. In regard to the plea that the worksheet showing duty calculation was not given to the appellant, the learned DR pointed out that it was not the case. In fact the work sheet was furnished along with the show cause .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X