9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 700X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is taken into account. Findings and conclusions of the Tribunal were based on evidence on record. Such evidence was not confined to a single statement of the proprietor. It is true that reliance was placed on such a statement which was not impermissible since the statement was never retracted. However, it would be incorrect to suggest that the conclusions of the Tribunal were based on a single factor namely unretracted statement of the proprietor. No substantial questions of law arise in these appeals - Decided against assessee. - TAX APPEAL NO. 1295 of 2014, TAX APPEAL NO. 1296 of 2014, TAX APPEAL NO. 1297 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 11-12-2014 - MR. AKIL KURESHI MR. VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, JJ. MR PARESH M DAVE, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n confirming excise duty demand against Krishna Screen Art on the basis that all the fabrics (i.e. 30,58,906 meters) recorded in books and bills of Shri Govardhan Textile were processed by Krishna Screen Art on power operated machines though the fabrics were hand processed at Shri Govardhan Textile? 4.Briefly, the controversy revolves around allegation of clandestine removal of goods by one M/s. Krishna Screen Art, a properitary concern whose properitor was one Mr. Rajen Ishwarlal Jariwala. The adjudicating authority after issuance of notice and adjudication thereof, confirmed the duty demand with interest and penalty upon which the assessees approached the Tribunal. The Tribunal, by the impugned judgement dated 23.04.2014, dismissed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... liance on several decisions of this Court reference to which would be made at a later stage. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the appellants and having perused the documents on record and, in particular, the impugned judgement of the Tribunal, we are of the opinion that no substantial questions of law arise in these appeals. As would be clear from our reasons recorded hereinafter,the Tribunal has given its conclusion on the factual finding based on evidence on record. Such findings cannot be stated to be perverse. When the Tribunal is final fact finding authority, any interference in the factual conclusion of the Tribunal would be permissible only if it is demonstrated that such findings are perverse in sense that the same are not bas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reto which have been culled out in the Annexure A to the show cause notice indicate that the said packing register specifically points out the activity undertaken by M/s. Sunira Traders for Shri Krishna Screen Print Art. 10.1 The statements of Shri Rajan Ishwar Jariwala and Shri Narendra Solanki indicated that the packing registers which were recovered from M/s. Sunira Traders were infact are co relatable for the activities. It is also noticed that the statements of Shri Rajan Ishwar Jariwala and more specifically statements dated 28.12.2004, 29.12.2004, 07.02.2005 and 08.02.2005 were recorded almost after three to four years from the date of first visit of the investigating officers. During the entire re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons and contentions on behalf of the assessee's on various issues including the absence of evidence of consumption of electricity for manufacturing such sizable quantity of the goods. In this respect, it was observed as under: As regards the argument made by the learned counsel to propose that there was no variation in electricity consumption to show such a huge manufacturing activity also needs to be discarded, as we find that the entire case is based upon the packing register maintained at the premises of M/s. Sunira Traders and accepted by the sole proprietor of the four units that the said register contains details of the processed fabrics received from Shri Krishna Screen Print Art; in view of such a categorical ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot voluntarily made. In view of such twin findings the appeal of the assessee was allowed. 3. In case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs Service Tax vs. Vishwa Traders P. Ltd. reported in 2013 (287) ELT 243 the department was in appeal against the decision of the Tribunal holding that the findings were not perverse and therefore the High Court would not interfere. The Department's appeal was dismissed. The judgement therefore does not lay down any ratio which could be applied in the present case. 4. In case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Omkar Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2010 (259) ELT 687 (Guj.) once again the department was in appeal against the judgement of the Tribunal. Main evidence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
