2005 (7) TMI 28

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppearing on behalf of the appellant, requested for permission to amend the appeal. Permission granted. Accordingly, the proposed questions have been taken on record and the appeal heard. 2. This appeal has been preferred challenging the order dated 12th January, 2005 made by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Regional Bench At Mumbai. Mr. R.M. Chhaya submitted that the Tri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ord. The Appellant, in the memo of appeal as well as at the time of hearing has emphasised on the singular fact that once the invoice reflected the total amount of duty payable it was for the assessee to show that it had not recovered the disputed amount from its customer. Both the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal have found from the facts on record that the presumption under Section 12B of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... iciency or otherwise of evidence cannot be a ground for interfering with findings of fact, if on the basis of evidence on record the conclusion is sound and reasonable and not perverse. 4. In these circumstances, the appellant has failed to make out any ground. The Tribunal's order does not give rise to any question of law, much less a substantial question of law, which would fall for considerati .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X