9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 623X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acturing unit as well as the authorised signatory of the recipient that the goods were cleared and received without payment of duty. It is a clear case of clandestine clearance of goods therefore the ratio of the decision of the case Orissa Bridge & Construction Corpn. Ltd. Vs. CCE [2008 (8) TMI 585 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] is not applicable on the facts of the present case. Thus, as per admissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Mills ltd. is engaged in the manufacture of M.S. ingots. M/s Sarada Steel Industries Ltd. is one of the buyers of the ingots manufactured by a manufacturing unit. The premise of M/s Sarada Steel Industries was searched by Revenue and it was found that they had received 99.435 Mts of ingots from M/s L. Kant Paper Mills Ltd. Shri Nikhil Kumar, Director of M/s L. Kant Paper Mills. In his statement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of duty. Shri Deepak, authorised signatory of M/s Sarada Steel Industries Ltd. whereby he admitted that all the quantity mentioned in the private records recovered from the premises are not shown in the statutory records. From these entries, it was found that the applicant M/s L. Kant Paper Mills has cleared the goods without payment of duty. 5. I find that the private records from M/s Sarada St ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und short were used in the final products which was cleared on payment of duty. In this situation the Tribunal held that in absence of evidence regarding manufacturer and clearance of the goods without payment of duty the demand is not sustainable. The facts of the present case are different. In the present case, the Director of the appellant firm and authorised signatory of the recipient of goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y. It is not the case of the appellant that in the monthly returns the appellant had reflected the clearance of the 99.435 MT ingots and the duty has been paid in respect of only 45.008 MT ingots only. It is a clear case of clandestine clearance of goods therefore the ratio of the above decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court is not applicable on the facts of the present case. In view of the admissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
