9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 733X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - This appeal of the Revenue is against dropping of demand of duty of Rs. 4,99,347/- by the lower appellate authority in favour of the respondents for the period 1994-95 and 1995-96 in respect of re-rolled products of iron and steel. The original authority had demanded the above amount of duty from the respondents for the above period after holding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed products by the respondents. It is submitted that such corroborative evidence was ignored by the Commissioner (Appeals). A list of documents relied on in the show-cause notice has been furnished by the appellant under ground No. 2. It is submitted that these documents were "corroborative to each other". Much reliance has been placed on the statement dt. 26-11-96 of Sri Joseph (an employee of M/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... their statements should not discounted. The ld. SDR has reiterated these ground of the appeal. 3. There is no representation for the respondents despite notice, nor any request of theirs for adjournment. 4. We have examined the records in general and the grounds of this appeal in particular. It is significant to note that certain crucial findings recorded by the lower appellate author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 33.2 lakhs could be manufactured leaving a profit of just Rs. 78,679/- to the respondents. The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has refused to accept the view that the respondents could have ventured into the exercise of clandestine manufacture of goods for the sake of this kind of a profit. The Appellate Commissioner's impression is seemingly prudent. The appellant has not placed on record any mater ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
