9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 407X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cipient of final product so as to come to a finding of clandestine removal. There is also nothing on record to show that the appellant had manufactured such a huge quantity of final product which stand cleared by them clandestinely - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Excise Appeal No. 2400 of 2007 - Final Order No. A/52633/2016-EX(DB) - Dated:- 27-7-2016 - Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) And V Padmanabhan, Member (Technical). Shri G R Singh, DR for the Appellant. ORDER Per Archana Wadhwa: Being aggrieved with the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Revenue has filed the present appeal. 2. We have heard Shri G R Singh, learned DR appearing for the Revenue. Nobody appeared for the respondent. 3. As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... em and entries made therein are not necessarily relatable to their activities. Revenue having been failed to make further investigation as regards the supply of raw material and receipient of final products, as also from the transporters etc. have failed to corroborate the allegation with requisite evidence so as to uphold the finding of clandestine removal. As such, by referring to various decisions of the Tribunal wherein it was held that the entries made in a private notebook, in the absence of credible corroborative evidence, are not sufficient to sustain the charge of clandestine removal, set aside the order of original adjudicating authority. As such, present appeal by the Revenue. 6. On going through the impugned order of Commissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nus to proof clandestine manufacture and removal of final product is placed heavily on the Revenue and is required to be discharged by production of sufficient, tangible and positive evidence. The allegation of clandestine removal cannot be upheld on the basis of mere entries made in certain private records recovered from the security gate of the factory. Revenue in their memo of appeal have not referred to any such evidence either coming from the raw material supplier or recipient of final product so as to come to a finding of clandestine removal. There is also nothing on record to show that the appellant had manufactured such a huge quantity of final product which stand cleared by them clandestinely. As such, we find no infirmity in the v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
