9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 584X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd transportation of the same as also the identification of the customers. Tribunal in the case of M/S. SAC POLYMERS VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE CUSTOMS CGST, NEW DELHI [ 2018 (7) TMI 523 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] have observed that charge of clandestine removal cannot be established merely on the ground of difference in the balance sheet and the statutory record unless the same is corroborated by any other evidence showing receipt of raw material, consumption of the same, production and removal of the final product. It is well established that the onus to prove the charges of clandestine removal lies very heavily upon the Revenue and is required to be discharged with production of sufficient positive evidences. The same cann ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... phate hepta and brass ingot respectively. Further taking the ground of Balance Sheet, the audit was of the view that the appellants had cleared excess quantity of 57.420 of Brass ingots. It was thus alleged that the appellants have cleared 118.107 MT Brass ingots in excess without payment of duty as per the details given in Annexure to the Show Cause Notice. 4. On being asked, appellants provided the reconciliation statement duly certified by CA stating that closing stock of 60.688 MT of brass cast were lying at their depot. Further, appellants stated that quantity of 32.528 MT lead scrap as clearance of brass ingots. 5. On the above basis, proceedings were initiated against them by way of issuance of a show cause notice dated 21.2.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raw materials, manufacture of the excess final product and transportation of the same as also the identification of the customers. Tribunal in the case of M/s SAC Polymers Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs CGST, New Delhi 2018 (7) TMT 523-CESTAT NEW DELHI have observed that charge of clandestine removal cannot be established merely on the ground of difference in the balance sheet and the statutory record unless the same is corroborated by any other evidence showing receipt of raw material, consumption of the same, production and removal of the final product. To the same effect is the Tribunal s decision in the case of M/s Navbharat Explosives Co. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Raipur 2018 (3) TMI 617 CESTAT NEW DELHI. 8. It is well ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
