9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 216X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... details of sales and clearances of finished goods) found in the factory and a statement of the partner are not adequate as evidence - officers have failed to investigate the case properly and had failed to provide sufficient evidence even to conclude preponderance of probability in favour of the department – revenue’s appeal rejected X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat evidence in the form of loose chits found in the factory and a statement of the partner are not adequate as evidence. Revenue is appeal against this decision. 2. Heard both sides. Learned SDR Dr. M.K. Rajak on behalf of the Revenue stated that in view of clear admission by the partner and payment of duty involved immediately after the search and also in view of the fact that the loose chits c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he factory premises showing the clearances of finished goods. He cited the decision of Tribunal in case of CCE, Ahmedabad v. Tirupati Processors- 2007 (212) E.L.T. 330, wherein it was held that when assessee himself had admitted that the goods were sold to unknown people in the market, Revenue can not be expected to find corroborative evidence. On the other hand, the learned advocate on behalf of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined to agree with the lower authorities that no case has been made out by the department. As observed by Commissioner (Appeals), not even stock taking was done and officers recovered loose papers and made out a case. Nowhere, it has been explained as to what details the loose papers contain and it is strange that even a single buyer could not be named by the partner. No enquiries seem to have bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
