9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 11X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the buyers, certain transports not evidenced, etc. These evidences can at best act as corroboration to a positive evidence of diversion. Otherwise, in the absence of any positive evidence, these pieces of alleged corroboration cannot by themselves legally sustain the allegation of diversion of huge quantity of imported duty free cloves. In the appeal, the Revenue has not brought out any material evidence, which will prompt us to interfere with the impugned order. We find no reason to arrive at a different conclusion based on the evidences analyzed by the Original Authority. Imposition of penalty on Shri Deepak Kumar Agarwal who is a major buyer of the product manufactured by the respondent company u/r 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. The customs duty of ₹ 1,01,37,500/- is sought to be demanded on these grounds. Further, central excise duty of ₹ 19,42,899/- short paid by the respondent on advance DTA sales is also sought to be recovered. The case was adjudicated and the original authority held that there is no evidence to sustain the allegation of illegal diversion of duty free imported items and hence, no customs duty can be demanded against the respondent. Regarding excise duty on clearance to DTA over and above the permissible limit, the Original Appellate Authority held that a sum of ₹ 6,66,852/- is payable by the respondent. This amount has already been calculated and paid by them. He imposed a penalty of ₹ 1 lakh on the respondent under R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the respondent do not possess the required facility to make the final product as approved by the Development Commissioner. We find that the presence of huge quantity of final product on the date of visit of the officers has not been examined and explained by the Revenue. Further, the correctness of the DTA sales has been questioned by the Revenue. The respondent contended that the various buyers have admitted the purchase from the respondent. Further, several companies have filed affidavits testifying genuineness of sales made to Ahmedabad parties. 6. We find that the Original Authority had examined each one of the aspects of the allegations made in the notice before arriving at the conclusion. The Revenue is aggrieved on the findin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
