9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 86X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se are that on the basis of intelligence gathered, the officers of the department conducted searches at the factory premises of the appellants on 12/13.12.2009 during which two spiral diaries were recovered from the cabin of the co-noticee containing details of despatches of paper based decorative sheets manufactured in the said factory. On the basis of statement of various persons recorded during and after the searches, an offence case for clandestine clearances was booked against the appellant. 2.2 A Show Cause Notice F. NO V.48/15-4/OFF/OA/2011-12 dated 25.4.2011 was issued to the appellants demanding Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 7,57,452/- under the proviso to Section 11A(i) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 by invoking extended ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he due process of law, did not agree with the contentions raised by the appellants and rejected the appeals. Hence these appeals. 4. Ld. Consultant appearing on behalf of the appellant after taking me through the entire case records, submits that the case made out against the main appellant for clandestine removal is based on the recovery of two spiral diaries and statements of the director and the despatch supervisor. It is his submission that no corroborative evidence has been adduced by the Revenue authorities in the form of consumption of additional electricity, procurement of unaccounted raw materials or packing materials. It is his submission that no evidence is also adduced as to the unaccounted manufacturing of the final products i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly maintained by the despatch supervisor. It is his submission that the Director had accepted that the said diaries were recovered from his possession in the factory premises. He would also submit that the director as well as the despatch supervisor has explained the abbreviation given in the said diary as to the name of the party, quality of the product and the amounts realised against such clearances which is itself indicative of the clandestine activity of the appellant. He would then referred to the letter dtd 11.3.2011 which has been written by the appellant Tuplip Lamkraft Pvt Ltd wherein the company has clearly admitted that the spiral diaries were having details of the clearances made which includes bogus as well as non-bogus custom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made by them to the authorities. In the absence of any such retractions, the statements of the appellant's director as well as despatch supervisor cannot be discarded. I agree that Ld. Consultant was correct in submitting that only statement of the director is not enough to come to a conclusion that there was clandestine removal. I find from the records that except for asserting that there was no clandestine manufacturing activity, the appellant has not adduced any creditable evidence to supplement their submission. I find from the grounds of appeal taken before the tribunal, the appellants have not contradicted the findings recorded by the lower authorities by any credible evidence. 9. The entire grounds of appeal of the appellants before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
