9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (11) TMI 160X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case are the appellants are manufacturers of printing ink classifiable under Chapter heading 32.15 of CET and were utilizing the printing ink captively in the printing of posters/pictures. They were also eligible for SSI exemption from 9/94 as per Notification No. 125/94 and they were availing Modvat facility. 3. The officers visited their unit on 20-11-95 and seized 3 note books. (i) Note book showing the production of printing ink pertaining to the period 1-4-93 to 15-6-94. (ii) Note book showing the production of printing ink relating to the period 2-5-94 to 14-8-95. (iii) Note books showing the production of printing ink relating to the period 16-9-95 to 16-11-95. 4. The officers also noticed shortage of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d out. It is their further contention that there is no evidence produced by the revenue with regard to the purchase of the inputs manufactured and clearance of the final product as noted in note book Nos. 2 3 which does not belong to them. Shri I. Gurusamy was elderly person who was not managing the factory but it was his son who was doing the work. He was present in the factory on that day and he was not aware of the details admitted by him in the note books seized but did accept the entries. Shri I. Gurusamy was cross-examined and has clearly stated that the details entered therein does not belong to their factory and the note books 2 3 had been left in the factory by Shri Ilangovan. However, their plea has not been accepted and deman ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als v. CCE, 2001 (130) E.L.T. 271 6. Ld. Counsel submits that the penalty is also not in commensurate with the duty liability. He also contended that Shri I. Gurusamy was not personally involved in the day to day affairs and had not directed his son to indulge in clandestine removal and therefore penalty under Rule 209A was not justified. 7. Ld. DR reiterated the findings recorded by the Commissioner and contends that the findings are clear in the light of submissions made and hence the order is required to be confirmed and the judgments relied by the appellants are distinguishable. 8. On a careful consideration we notice that the appellants have admitted the contents of note book No. 1 and have no objection in confirming the demands ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot admitted the contents of note book Nos. 2 3. Further in the light of settled law the demand cannot be confirmed on the basis of the entries made in note book Nos. 2 3 as has been laid down in the judgments referred to before us. In order to confirm demands on clandestine removal the Revenue has to produce corroborative evidence in the form of receipt of raw materials, manufacturing details, use of electricity, sale of goods and receipt of money as had been laid down in the above noted judgments. In view of the Revenue not having further investigated and also not having examined the scribe of note book Nos. 2 3, the plea of the appellants is required to be accepted and demands confirmed with regard to the clearance shown in private ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
