9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 325X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 16-SM(BR) - Dated:- 26-10-2016 - Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (T) Shri Prateek, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri S. Nunthuk, AR, for the Respondent. ORDER The brief facts of the case are that M/s. Sindh Ispat, Raipur, a partnership firm are engaged in the manufacture of re-rolled products of iron and steel items such as M.S. Angles, Rounds, Squares, Flats, etc. Shri Om Prakash Agarwal is a partner of M/s. Sindh Ispat. Two appeals are by M/s. Sindh Ispat and two are by Shri Om Prakash Agarwal. The officers of Directorate of Central Excise Intelligence conducted certain investigations with the suppliers of M.S. Ingots viz. M.S. Steel Abrasives Industries Ltd., M/s. Hanumant Ingots Pvt. Ltd., Raipur. During the course of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. I have heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. 3. The main appellants are challenging the findings of the lower authorities regarding unaccounted manufacture and clearance of dutiable items. Ld. Counsel for the appellants submitted that the Department did not conduct the detailed investigation with reference to transportation of the raw materials/finished goods, receipt of sale proceeds, etc. and as such, there is no corroborative evidence to sustain the case of clandestine manufacture and clearance. Further, the record of third party regarding supplies of ingots and the statement of suppliers cannot be held against the appellants. The statement given by the partner of the appellant firm, Shri Om Prakash Agarwal cannot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... partner of the appellant s unit, he categorically admitted unaccounted clearance of dutiable items. However, he did not name the buyers to whom such products were sold. In such situation, it is strange that the appellant has taken a plea that the department has not established the details of buyers and transport of the finished goods to such buyers. It is seen that the records maintained by the suppliers, which were affirmed by the persons incharge cannot be brushed aside. It is not the case of the appellant that the suppliers maintained such records only to falsely implicate the appellant. In fact, the supply of unaccounted raw materials has been corroborated by the partner of the appellant s firm. In such situation, it is not tenable for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
