9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 706X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... factory premises of M/s Windson Chem Industries (appellant-assessee), recovered some computer generated delivery challans which indicated the details such as party name, challans number, vehicle number, drivers name, particulars of goods, quantity, rate, amount. On comparison of the statutory records and sales invoices maintained by the appellant-assessee, it was noticed that the said delivery challans were not recorded in the statutory books. The preventive officers recorded the statement of the proprietor of the appellant-assessee as well as the statements of the purchasers of the goods from the appellant-assessee. The Show Cause Notice dt.06.05.2009 was issued for confirmation of demand of duty along with interest on allegation that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould also submit that there is no documentary evidence about the clandestine removal of the goods or inputs from the factory of the appellant. It is his submission that the Revenue authorities have contacted only three buyers and they have stated that they have not received the goods and other buyers who are indicated in the delivery challans, were not contacted by the Department. It is his submission that there is no corroborative evidence of the clandestine clearances. It is also his submission that the Revenue did not conduct any investigation as regards the supply of raw material without invoice. It is his submission that unless there is receipt of clandestinely procured raw materials, there cannot be any clandestine manufacturing and r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the duty demanded as penalty to the appellant under the provisions of Section 11AC. It is his submission that condition precedent of giving the benefit of payment of 25% of the duty confirmed as penalty is absent in this case and hence the impugned order to that extent is incorrect and should be set aside. 5. After considering the submissions made by both sides and after the perusal of the records, I find that the issue involved is regarding clandestine removal of the finished goods by the appellant-assessee. 6. I find that the proprietor of the firm Shri Vinodbhai T. Patel, in his statement dt.20.03.2007, has accepted that there was clandestine removal. I also find that Shri Vinodbhai Patel, in his subsequent statement on 20.10.2008 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not have any merit. 8. Accordingly, since there is no retraction of the statements by the proprietor of the appellant-assessee and there being corroboration of the receipt of the goods without payment of duty from the appellant-assessee from his buyers, I find that the impugned order has correctly upheld the liability on the appellant-assessee along with interest and penalties. 9. As regards the appeal filed by the Revenue, I find that the proposition that the assessee should be given the benefit of provisions of Section 11AC even at appellate stage, is now well settled by the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Akash Fashion Prints Pvt. Limited - 2009 (239) ELT 439 (Guj). Hence, I do not find any merit in the appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
