9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 300X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Appellant has also enclosed the relevant Shipping Bill, E-Way Bill/Bill of Lading and other documentary evidence. This shows that the Adjudicating Authority has not gone through all the documentary evidence properly before coming to his conclusion. The entire proceedings have been taken up on the basis of the turnover shown by the Appellant in their Profit Loss Account and Balance Sheet. When the Appellant provides the proof that turnover also consists of direct exports and exports through merchant exporters along with the documentary evidence, it is the duty of the Adjudicating Authority to get these facts properly verified and to give a detailed findings as to why the documentary evidence submitted would not be sufficient to prove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the Tribunal to hear the matter on merits. This Tribunal vide Order dated M-193/S-596/A-753/KOL/2008 dated 16/07/2008 remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority with the following directions:- In view of submission that materials are available to lead appropriate defence, to meet the ends of justice, we are of the view that the appellant may be granted an opportunity to explain its case to the learned Adjudicating Authority adducing entire evidence which goes to the root of the matter. To bring an end to the dispute the Appellant shall cooperate without seeking unnecessary adjournments before the learned Adjudicating Authority. The demand involved being huge, that Authority may dispose the matter at least by end of December, 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ugh merchant exporters and local sales of manufactured goods and traded goods. He submits that if these documents were properly verified, the Adjudicating Authority would have easily come to a conclusion that major portion of the demand is required to be dropped on account of the turnover of direct exports and exports through merchant exporters. He submits that this detailed verification was never taken up by the Adjudicating Authority. He also submits that for the period 1995-96 1996-97, 1997-98, 1998-99, they also sought small scale exemption for the turnover as was applicable during that time. He submits that even this request was not properly considered by the Adjudicating Authority. He further submits that they have filed year-wise, in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the proof that turnover also consists of direct exports and exports through merchant exporters along with the documentary evidence, it is the duty of the Adjudicating Authority to get these facts properly verified and to give a detailed findings as to why the documentary evidence submitted would not be sufficient to prove their exports, if he intends to confirm demand. It cannot be a case that the Appellant failed to even partly prove the details of export undertaken by them directly or through merchant exporter as is being made out in the impugned OIO. As the matter pertains to 1996-97 and 1997-98 and denovo adjudication was to be taken up in 2008, much better and larger efforts should have been made by the Adjudicating Authority to follow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
