2016 (3) TMI 306

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s. In the case of Vinod Solanki Vs. G.O.I (2008 (12) TMI 31 - SUPREME COURT ), held that mere retraction of confession is not sufficient to make confessional statement irrelevant. It has been held by Supreme Court in the case of K.I. Pavunny Vs. Astt Collector Cochin [1997 (2) TMI 97 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ] that confessional statement, if found voluntarily, can form the sole basis for conviction. Needless to say that rigor of evidence required for imposition of penalty is less than that required for conviction as for penalty the principle adopted in "preponderance of probability" while for conviction it is beyond “reasonable doubt”. In the present case, the statements are also corroborated by the evidence in the form of vehicle numbers .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... /s. Vibha Steel Pvt. Ltd. There were 23 invoices issued by the appellant in favour of M/s. Vibha Steels Pvt. Ltd without any material supplied to M/s. Vibha Steels Pvt. Ltd. On the basis of such invoices M/s. Vibha Steels Pvt. Ltd. took CENVAT Credit of ₹ 441864/-. In these circumstances, the said penalty was imposed on the appellant for its act of omission and commission. 2. When the case was called today, there was no representation on behalf of the appellant. I find that even on earlier occasions, nobody appeared on behalf of the appellant. Therefore, I proceed to decide the case on merits. 3. In its appeal, the appellant has essentially contented that Mr. Sunil Rawlani had retracted his statements and there was no discrepanc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n of confession is not sufficient to make confessional statement irrelevant. It has been held by Supreme Court in the case of K.I. Pavunny Vs. Astt Collector Cochin 2002-TIOL -7390-SC- CUS LB that confessional statement, if found voluntarily, can form the sole basis for conviction. Needless to say that rigor of evidence required for imposition of penalty is less than that required for conviction as for penalty the principle adopted in preponderance of probability while for conviction it is beyond reasonable doubt . In the present case, the statements are also corroborated by the evidence in the form of vehicle numbers belonging to vehicles which could not transport such goods in such quantities and also the shortage noticed at the end .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X