9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 35X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evenue and Shri P.M. Dave, learned Advocate appearing for the Respondent. 2. The issue involved is clandestine removal, which got initiated on the date of visit of Central Excise officers in the assessee's factory on 08.12.01. Manager's statement was recorded, which was subsequently retracted by the General Manager on 21.12.01. On 29.10.04, the assessee gave details of various lot numbers involved and the invoice numbers under which the goods were cleared. Show cause notice was issued on 19.4.05, which was dropped by the original adjudicating authority on the ground that the discrepancies stand explained by the assessee and there is no corroborative evidence to sustain the allegations of clandestine removal. 3. The R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rength of statement of Mr.Pravinbhai L. Patel that all such quantity of Cotton Fabrics and MMF admeasuring at 91128 L. Mtr. of value Rs.20,90,299/- were cleared in past clandestinely. From where and from whom such cotton fabrics/MMF, (grey fabrics) were purchased or were brought by way of purchase or for job-work. The visiting officer from Revenue Department very plainly and innocently had admitted the statement of Mr. Pravinbhai L. Patel as gospel of truth as if all such processed fabrics were sold in cash at factory gate. The names of purchaser were not elicited nor the statement of even any one of the supplier/purchases, office bearer of such company or of the office/director were got recorded. The statement of Mr.P.L. Patel was admi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... every reason to believe that the shortages of the fabrics whether at grey stage or at process stage were got forcefully admitted from Mr.Patel for making a case as if it had reached to al dead end as far as further investigation were concerned." The learned Commissioner (Appeals) also found that there is no corroborative evidence and as such by taking note of the earlier decision, rejected the appeal. 4. I find no infirmity in the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Revenue has not referred to or adduced any evidences to establish beyond doubt that the goods were clandestinely removed from the respondent's factory. Both the authorities below have examined the available evidences in detail and have rightly concluded th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
