9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 468X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... moval of the goods - demand set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No. E/52453/2018 [SM], E/52679/2018 [SM] - FINAL ORDER No. 50091-50092/2019 - Dated:- 15-1-2019 - MRS. RACHNA GUPTA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Present for the Appellant: Mr. M. Saharan, Advocate Present for the Respondent: Mr. Tamana Alam, DR ORDER PER: RACHNA GUPTA Present order disposes of two appeals arising out of two separate adjudication by Commissioner(Appeals) vide Orders No. 002-APP-114-18-19 and 002-APP-115-18-19 both dated 03.05.2018. 2. The appellants herein are the manufacturer of sponge iron and were also engaged in manufacture of MS ingots, re-rolled products, etc. falling under Chapter Heading N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terest and penalty of same amount. Further penalty of ₹ 2,50,000 stands imposed upon Shri J.R. Gour, the Director (co-appellant) in terms of Rule 26 of Central Excise Rule, 2002. Hence, the present appeals have been filed. 4. I have heard Mr. Himanshu Bansal, ld. Counsel for the appellant and Mr.P.R. Gupta, ld. DR for the Department. 5. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that it is only from the scrutiny of documents as recovered from the premises of M/s. Monu Steels that the name of appellant emerged. Appellant himself is the manufacturer of MS Ingots and is clearing his product on payment of appropriate duty of excise and is also availing credit thereof. It is alleged that demand upon appellant has been confirmed after ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined a view that the appellant is indulging the clandestine clearances. When the Director of the appellant was contacted by Revenue, he very clearly, in his statement recorded by the officers, deposed that he does not even know M/s Monu Steels. However, he used to meet Mr. Bal Mukund Pansari, the nephew of Shri S.K. Pansari of M/s.Monu Steels. Said Mr. Bal Mukund had admittedly expired. Mr.S.K. Pansari during his cross-examiantion also didn t deny this fact rather admitted that all the recovered documents were written by Mr. Bal Mukund. Department has failed to obtain any document, as direct evidence, to corroborate the said recovered record. The same also finds mention in the order under challenge. Further, the Revenue has not made any oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
