9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 543X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Central Excise challenges the final order dated 30 January, 2004 on the file of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai [2004 (166) E.L.T. 133 (Tri.-Chennai)]. 2. The appellant appears to have initiated proceedings against the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the assessee ) on the basis of statements given by the suppliers of Beeri Tobacco. The uncorroborated state ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the assessee. In the absence of any positive materials to prove the clandestine dealings, the Commissioner disagreed with the views expressed by the original authority. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed. 4. The said order was challenged by the Revenue before the Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as CESTAT ). The CESTAT opined that the revenue misera ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nding Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the statements given by the suppliers indicated clandestine dealings of the assessee and as such, the CESTAT was not correct in its finding that there were no materials before the assessing authority to arrive at a finding against the assessee. 7. None appears for the assessee. 8. We have perused the materials relied on by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty. 10. In the absence of any such materials, it cannot be said that the Commissioner (Appeals) was not justified in setting aside the order passed by the assessing authority. The matter was independently considered by the CESTAT, in its capacity as the final authority on facts. The CESTAT after giving its own reasons concurred with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). We do not find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
