9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (7) TMI 84X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. There is no request for adjournment also. 2. Heard ld. SDR for the department and perused the records. 3. The relevant facts, in brief are, as follows: (a) On 6-9-2001 when the officers visited the respondent's unit and verified stock of raw materials, they found shortage of 450 mts. of iron and steel scrap materials valued at Rs. 31,50,000/-. (b) Shri Rajnibhai Chimanlal Parikh, Director of the company, in his statement dated 6-9-2001 stated that the raw materials found short were, in fact, cleared by them as such without issuing any invoice, without payment of Central Excise duty and without accounting the same in any of the records as they were in urgent need of cash flow. (c) They paid a sum of Rs. two lakhs on 7-9-2001 and bala ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellants admitted the liability just to buy the peace or perhaps for the reason so that no further investigation could be carried out for any specific item or for anything else.... It appears someone may have pointed that against payment made in Sept., 2001, the assessment is still pending for regularization and finalization and hence SCN was slapped on the appellant on 2nd January, 2006. On part of the departmental officers in issuing SCN after a lapse of nearly four and half years there exists some liability against them I do find that there is no case at all, no evidence at all, no allegation at all for sustaining the demand against the appellant barring a pure and simple dictated confession on part of Mr. Parikh, one of the non- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Appeals) has been empowered under Section 35A to pass such order as he thinks just and proper, confirming, modifying or annulling decision or order appealed against. As a statutory authority hearing appeals, he has every right arid in fact duty bound to appreciate the evidence placed before him. However, an appeal proceeding cannot be treated as if a disciplinary proceedings against the investigating officers and the Adjudicating Authority. 5.3 There are certain strong and adverse findings against the Department and its officers, which are, prima facie, even beyond the allegations and submissions made by the appellants before him. Most of these observations are unsubstantiated as the order does not contain/disclose the grounds/reasons, if ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that everything was got written and were got signed so that one automatically reached to dead end of investigation. Such a find definitely requires to be substantiated. But the material has not been disclosed and discussed. Further, I find that there are other conclusions, findings, observations without indicating the reasons for arriving at such conclusions. 5.5 If there were no materials to support the above findings and observations, then the order suffers from serious flaw. Such an approach of finding fault with other statutory authorities with out valid materials deserves to be discouraged. One can disagree and overrule without being nasty. 6.1 More importantly, the order lacks clarity on the core issue, namely, of duty demand. 6.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
