9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog1984 (2) TMI 320X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... staff intercepted a lorry bearing No. MDY 8021 which was coming from Vadapathimangalam, near a place known as Lakshmangudi, and the lorry was found to contain 18 barrels of molasses which were being transported without any gate pass or transport document evidencing payment of excise duty. The owner of the molasses present in the lorry gave a statement confessing to the fact that, as he had done on previous occasions, in the instant case, he was transporting 18 barrels of molasses from the appellant-sugar mills and this was also confirmed by the statements of the lorry driver and the cleaner and corroborated by the relevant endorsement in the goods vehicle record relating to the lorry in question. A scrutiny of the records in the appellant- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the same by the Tribunal is contrary to law. (3) Discrepancies in the R.G. 1 register of the appellant relating to the molasses in question not having been brought out in the show cause notice specifically should not be legally relied upon by the reviewing authority, viz., the Collector of Central Excise, much less by the Tribunal, 4. The learned Senior Departmental Representative opposed the reference application and contended, inter alia, that :- (1) The order of the Tribunal is based on an appreciation of the evidence on record and no question of law at all arises for reference to the High Court as per law. When the appellant has cross-examined the witnesses during the review proceedings before the Collector, and for valid reas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant. More important than that is the fact that appellant never even assailed the Order-in-Review of the Collector on the ground that the R.G. 1 register discrepancy had not been mentioned in the show cause notice; nor pleaded any prejudice on that score before the Tribunal. When the appellant-sugar mills themselves admittedly did not argue this point at all and hence not covered by the order of the Tribunal the question of making a reference in that regard would not just arise. 5. The question that arises for consideration in the above matter is whether any question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal referred to supra, meriting a reference to the High Court. So far as the appreciation of evidence is concerned, I agree wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice issued by the reviewing authority. It was also fairly conceded by the learned Counsel for the applicant that he did not argue this point before the Tribunal. In these circumstances, I fail to see how it is open to the applicant now to raise this issue and seek reference of the same to the High Court as a question of law. In my opinion, no question of law at all arises on this and the applicant-sugar mills not having raised it in the grounds of appeal and not having argued this point before the Tribunal are not entitled to rake up this in a reference application for the first time. Likewise, the submission of the learned Counsel for the applicant regarding the non-mention of R.G. 1 register discrepancy in the show cause notice of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
