9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 721X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said date. Further, I also agree with his argument that the case has to be seen not having regard to how many pieces of evidences are there but with reference to quality of the evidence available. Though in this case only one piece of evidence is produced but that has very strong force - prima facie case is against the assessee - stay granted partly. - E/40984/2013 - Misc. Order No.42209/2013 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods were cleared without payment of duty. Based on such reasoning show-cause notice was issued and adjudicated resulting in confirmation of duty demand of Rs.12,15,018/- along with interest and penalty of equal amount under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Aggrieved by the order, the applicant filed an appeal with the Commissioner (Appeals) who did not give any relief. Hence the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to show procurement of raw material, manufacture of goods and unaccounted sale of goods and realization of the sale proceeds. Therefore, he argues that the case made out by the Revenue is not maintainable and this appeal may be admitted without any predeposit. 3. Opposing the prayer, the learned AR for Revenue submits that the applicant was a 100% EOU till 14.8.2007 on which date they de-bonded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submissions of both sides. I find substantial merit in the argument of the learned AR that the date 14.8.2007 is not an arbitrary date and the applicant has to account goods for the prior period and it cannot be accounted by showing clearance after the said date. Further, I also agree with his argument that the case has to be seen not having regard to how many pieces of evidences are there but wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
