2018 (1) TMI 1633

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e the representative of the Excise Department has the physical control as per the Central Excise law. Thus, the Central Excise officer is posted in the factory, so, no cigarettes can go outside without his approval. The statement of the personal incharge was recorded where they accepted that plane brand cigarette was manufactured. The department has not made out any investigation from the buyers. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... respondent assessee is engaged in the manufacture of cigarettes which attract Central Excise duty. On 23.10.2008, a search was conducted at the business premises of the appellant where the statement of the personnel incharge was recorded and material was seized. Later on, a case was made out by the Department for the clandestine removal of the goods and demanded the duty was raised. But, by the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... brand cigarette was manufactured. The department has not made out any investigation from the buyers. For the so-called clandestine removal, no investigation was made out. No attempt was examined for the consumption of raw material, electricity, manpower etc. Thus, there is no proof of clandestine removal of the goods. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the department has no merit and the same i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X