9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (12) TMI 225X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the processing of grey fabrics. The officers of Central Excise intercepted one vehicle carrying the processed textile fabrics from the said respondents' factory. On verification, the officers found that the duty paying documents accompanying the goods in question were not matching with the description of the goods found in the said vehicle. Accordingly, the goods as also the vehicle were seized and brought back to the factory, where further verification was done. As a result of examination of the documents and verification of the stock, the officers found that the records were not maintained properly and in some cases, there were excess quantity of the grey fabrics than what was recorded in Form IV register. Similarly, it was noticed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rving that the goods seized from the tempo were duly covered by Gate Passes and there were only minor discrepancies in the number of classification lists etc. In the absence of any other evidence to show that the goods were cleared without payment of duty, the confiscation of the fabrics and the vehicle was not justified. She also observed that the shortages etc. were on account of shrinkage and discrepancy in description or marking would not amount to clandestine removal, and hence, the demands were dropped. 6.The Revenue is aggrieved with the above order of the Commissioner; hence the present appeals. 7.We have heard Shri Uma Shankar, ld. SDR appearing for the Revenue and Shri R. Swaminathan, ld. Consultant for the Respondents. 8.Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered in Form IV register were subsequently entered and dealt with in accordance with law. As such there is no question of any demand of duty on such goods. As regards confiscation of fabrics, he submits that the disputed duty is the additional excise duty under Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act 1957 and as per the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of M/s. Pioneer Silk Mills reported in 1995 (80) E.L.T. 507 (Del.), neither the fabrics can be confiscated nor the penalties can be imposed. The said decision of the Delhi High Court was subsequently confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court when the appeals filed by Union of India were dismissed [2002 (145) E.L.T. A74 (S.C.)]. As such he submits that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmissioner, we do not find any reference to the statements or the other evidences relied upon in the show cause notice or to the submissions made by the respondents. As such, we feel that the impugned order should be set aside and the matter should be remanded to the Commissioner for deciding the disputed issue of demand of duty against M/s. Ujagar Textile Industries Pvt. Ltd. afresh. However, we make it clear that where the said respondents had already entered the excess goods found in the statutory records and cleared subsequently on payment of duty, the demand for the same is not required to be confirmed again. Similarly, in respect of the grey fabrics found in excess than the recorded balance, cannot call for any demand of duty on the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
