Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2006 (3) TMI 680

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... an-made fabrics are produced. The process like bleaching, dyeing, printing and finishing are undertaken by the appellants on grey man-made fabrics supplied by various traders. 3. On the basis of intelligence gathered some preventive officers of the department visited appellants premise and seized a tempo loaded with 97 pieces of processed man-made fabrics measuring 8017.50 metres. This fabric was seized as their description and quantity did not tally with the accomparying gate passes and there were certain discrepancies in the duplicate and triplicate copy of the gate passes. The officers also seized 6072 linear metres of man-made fabrics lying in the premises in semi-finished condition on the ground that it was excess stock i.e. fabrics .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e four sub-contractors referred to above. These sub-contractors have in their respective statement stated that their worker were processing fabrics on tables and one Shri Rana, clerk of the factory was writing file No. 73. Since the entire case was based upon the entries made in File No. 73 which referred to the fabrics processed by the above four contractors and since File No. 73 was written by Shri Rana, they have requested for cross-examination of all these four sub-contractors along with Shri Rana. There request was however rejected and the Commissioner has stated that once the copies of their statement have been supplied to them, they can comment on the same. On rejection of their request of cross-objection, they have filed an affidavi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Therefore, once the demand is based only on the statements and contents of file No. 73, it was crucial that cross-examination of the persons whose statements have been recorded and who has written file No. 73 should have been allowed as it is only these persons who could have explained the nature of entries made in these files and whether there was multi-entries in respect of the same fabrics or not. More so when the customers whose name and addresses were available were also not contacted by the department. Without testing veracity of statement of these persons, no reliance could have been placed on these statements. Further, it is the case of the department that the labourers of sub-contractors namely Bhimrao Fakira, Maruti Patil and Raja .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by the principal contractors alleging that majuri charges for processing 84,03,368 meters of fabrics were paid by the appellants to these contractors. Commissioner vide his order-in-original has confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 1,77,80,128/-. The order was passed mainly on four grounds i.e. (1) Names of contractor in the case and names of the contractors in the second case are different and hence both the proceedings were different from each other. (2) Payments made by the appellants to these contractors was admitted by the appellant and therefore no other evidence was required for demanding the duty. (3) Since payment of Majuri bills by the appellant was admitted, there was no need to contact any customers for establishing whether th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... llant has cleared 91,65,991.75 metres of fabrics on payment of duty during the period in question, the quantity of fabrics allegedly cleared in the first proceedings is 75,20,716.50 L. Metres and the quantity alleged to have been cleared in this case is 84,03,368 metres those totalling 25090075.25 for entire period from November, 1988 to May, 1991. Such enormous quantity of fabrics could not have been processed by the appellant considering the machinery installed, number of working days during the entire period, No. of workers employed etc., evidence regarding which were produced in those proceeding. 15. It was accordingly submitted that in this case also same sub-contractor and contractors are involved and also arises out of the same fac .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates