9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2004 (1) TMI 116X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtaining to removal and documents were recovered. Based on statements and on these slips, the case has been booked on the allegation that there has been manufacture and removal of these goods without payment of duty and the duty & penalty has been confirmed. 2. Ld. Counsel submits that it is well settled law that there has to be a proof of purchase of raw materials, manufacture of final goods, sale of the same to the parties, receipt of amount and flow back of funds. There is no evidence on record except certain private slips which cannot be the basis for the purpose of confirming duty. In this regard, he submits that large number of judgments were relied by them but the Commissioner has refused to follow the same although he has noted tho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s that in the case of M/s. Siemens Ltd. v. CCE - 1994 (70) E.L.T. 305 wherein it has been held that non-accountal of goods received under the bond should be explained by the appellants. There cannot be any direct evidence in such cases and the same has to be inferred from the facts available in a particular case. 4. In counter, learned Counsel submitted that in the cited case, there was goods received under bond and there were circumstances to show manufacture of final product, while in the present case, there is no such circumstances including use of electricity. Ld. Counsel also relied on the judgment of High Court of Allahabad rendered in the case of Quality Exports & Chemicals v. CCE, Meerut, 2002 (140) E.L.T. 362 (All.) = 2002 (48) RL ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here is no evidence pertaining to flow back of funds. Therefore, the entire case is based on chits does not have reliability and credibility. The citations relied by ld. DR and the Commissioner shows that there was receipt of goods through bond and there were large number of other evidences which showed the circumstances for having manufactured the goods. There was also physical verification of stocks and there was shortage of stock. In view of these circumstances, the Tribunal held that clandestine manufacture and removal of goods was proved by Revenue. The evidence has been analyzed in great detail and was found that there was clandestine manufacture & removal of goods, while in the present case, except the slips and the statement of witn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
