9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 72X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of demand is not sustainable. The Original Authority should have confirmed the demand on the basis of evidence admissible to law. We do not find any such evidence relied upon by the Original Authority - The manufacturer-appellant’s appeal is allowed by us by setting aside that part of the Order-in-Original through which a demand of ₹ 56 lakhs confirmed. Penalty imposed is set aside - decided in favor of assessee. - APPEAL Nos. E/70511, 70303 & 70653/2017-EX[DB] - A/72353-72355/2018-EX[DB] - Dated:- 17-9-2018 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Anurag Mishra Ms Pragya Pandey, Advocates for Appellant Shri Rajeev Ranjan, Additional Commissioner (AR), for Responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n respect of said 231 invoices appellant-manufacturer suppressed the value and paid less duty. The appellant manufacturer accepted the demand confirmed on account of such under valuation and they are not contesting the same. In respect of the 231 invoices allegation of revenue was that a parallel set of 231 invoices were generated by the appellant-manufacturer and the same invoices were sent to business concerns other than M/s Sukam and revenue has demanded duty on the same. The Original Authority has held that there cannot be repeated demand of duty on the same goods even if invoices are generated twice and therefore he has dropped the proceedings. Revenue has preferred appeal against the said decision of Original Authority. One more issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by name Mr. Tapas Raut. Learned Counsel for manufacturer appellant has submitted that since the cross examination of Mr. Tapas Raut was not allowed by learned Original Authority, the statement of Shri Tapas Raut is not admissible evidence. He has further submitted that Original Authority has relied on manufacturer-appellant s statement during proceeding that they do not want to contest the issue for peace of mind and therefore the learned Original authority has come to a conclusion that appellant has evaded Central Excise duty of ₹ 56 lakhs. We note that the finding by the Original Authority in respect of 231 invoices and 52 invoices is not sustainable and revenue has not put-forth any ground to deal with the findings of Original Aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
