9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1166X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) were affirmed by the Tribunal by observing that there was no other evidence on record to prove the clandestine activities of the assessee as the revenue has not conducted further investigations to establish the identity of the buyers or the suppliers of the raw-materials or the transporters. Further, it was held by the Tribunal that mere shortages detected at the time of visit of the officers cannot ipso facto lead to the allegations and findings of clandestine removal. - No illegality or perversity could be pointed out in the aforesaid findings of fact recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal which may warrant interference by this Court. Accordingly, no substantial question of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fice of their adjoining family concern M/s Adhunik Industrial Corporation, Batala due to repair work. Thereafter, the physical verification of the stock of raw material and finished goods of the assessee was conducted. As a result thereof, 239.945 MT of inputs, i.e., pig iron and 133 MT of the finished products involving central excise duty of ₹ 16,00,306/- was found short. Accordingly, the stock verification report was prepared on the spot which was signed by the Panches and Shri Kamal Kant. As per the revenue, Shri Kamal Kant in his statement dated 16.7.2008 stated that they were engaged in the manufacture of goods under the brand name Anand only which was unregistered brand name and prior to 2007-08, they were also engaged in the t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er dated 7.2.2014 (Annexure A-1) affirmed the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and rejected the appeal. Hence, the present appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal of the department without discussing the arguments raised by the department and the provisions of law regarding maintenance of records. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, we do not find any merit in the appeal. 6. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the findings of the clandestine removal of the goods recorded by the adjudicating authority by holding that the assessee's record which were admittedly lying in the adjoining sister concern M/s Adhunik Industrial Corporation were not scrutnized. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recorded by the Tribunal read thus:- 7. The Revenue has again reiterated the same stand that as shortages detected at the time of visit of the officers, which has to be held that the respondents had cleared their final product in a clandestine manner. Admittedly, there is no other evidence on record so as to relate to the clandestine activities of the assessee. The Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly relied upon the various decisions of the Tribunal including the decision in the case of Jai Timber Company Vs. CCE C, Bhopal [2009 (234) ELT 457 (Tib.-All)] and has rightly concluded that mere shortages detected at the time of visit of the officers cannot ipso facto lead to the allegations and findings of clandestine removal. 7. No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
