9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (3) TMI 667X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , for the Appellant. Shri S.J. Vyas, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T)]. - Offence case was registered against M/s. Gayatri Dyechem and others by the Revenue on the ground that they were engaged in evasion of Central Excise duty by suppressing production and clandestine removals to avail SSI exemption by staying within the limits. It is the case of the Revenu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yechem and other concerned persons also. On an appeal filed by the appellants, Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeals and set aside the adjudication order confirming the demand for duty imposing redemption fine and imposing penalties on all persons excepted two persons who had not filed appeal. Hence Revenue has filed this appeal. 2. Learned D.R., on behalf of Revenue submitted that 4,75 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emsp;We have considered the submissions made by both the sides. We find that Commissioner (Appeals) has dropped the demand of duty on the ground that the duty demand as well as demand of duty on 1,605 Kgs of dyes has been made on the ground that Gayatri Dyechem cleared the dyes without payment of duty and they had also exceeded the value of clearances and actual value of clearances was Rs. 95,80,7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been made twice. Further, 4,755 Kgs of dyes were seized at the godown of Camex Colours Ltd. but there is no proof or corroborative evidence to show that these goods were actually illicitly manufactured and cleared by M/s. Gayatri Dyechem. Verification of stock on 1-9-1999 at the factory of Gayatri Dyechem, did not reveal any discrepancy. The whole case has been made out on the basis of stateme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
