9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (5) TMI 513X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. The said demand stands confirmed against the appellant on the ground that the value of the grey fabrics received by them from merchant manufacturers was high than the value declared by them in the grey bills. The proceedings were initiated as a result of search conducted at merchant manufacturer premises wherein the duplicate set of bills showing the higher value of the grey fabrics were recovered and seized. As a result of such recovery, statements of various merchant manufacturers were recorded. Statement of the appellants Managing Director Shri S.P. Arya as also of their Manager Shri M.K. Mishra were recorded. 3. Based upon the above, proceedings were initiated against the appellant alleging under valuation of the goods and proposing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly arrived at the assessable value of the fabrics but submits that for the said purpose he has to rely upon price declaration made by the merchant manufacturer. This is what they have done and inasmuch as, there was no doubt as regards the correctness of the value of the grey fabrics, they accepted the declarations made by the merchant manufacturers. Drawing our attention to the statement of Shri S.P. Arya and Shri M.K. mishra, Ld. Advocate submits that reading of the said statements would clearly show that the appellants had no knowledge about the value of the grey fabrics being on the higher side and they were bonafidely adopting the value declared by them. There is also nothing in the statement of the merchant manufacturers to show that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have been picked-up from the statement. As such, we find that the said findings are based upon misreading and misquoting of the statement of Shir S.P. Arya. 7. We further note that the appellant Manager Shri M.K. Mishra in his statement recorded on 30.05.1998 has clearly depose that the price declaration was filed by them in the basis of grey bills given to them by their merchant manufacturer. He further deposed that the bills now being shown to them were never supplied to them by the said merchant manufacturers and as such they had no reason to doubt the bona fide of the prices declared by them or the bills given by them. He clarified in the said statement that they had no recourse to counter verify the prices declared by the merchant man ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s as declared by the merchant manufacturers, extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. Similarly in the case of Paras Prints Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Surat [2000 (120) ELT 662 (Tribunal)], Tribunal in an identical set of facts and circumstances, observed that failure on part of the processor to ascertain the correct value of the grey fabrics cannot be a reason to invoke the extended period unless it is shown on record that the appellant knew or deliberately failed to declared the correct cost of the grey fabrics. It was further observed that there was legal requirement for the processors to verify the correctness of the declaration made by the suppliers of the grey fabrics. Similar views were held in the case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
