9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (12) TMI 188X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Certificate issued by the Registrar of Companies. The appellant shall be known as Arch Pharmalabs Limited. 2. This appeal arises from OIA No. 118/2002, dated 22-10-2002 confirming the demands on the allegation of clandestine removal of goods manufactured and cleared on the basis of delivery challans and commercial invoices. There is also reliance on the statements and on the private diar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manyam, the finding arrived at by the Commissioner are assumptions and is not correct in law. 3. The learned Counsel arguing for the appellants submitted that it is now well settled that entries made in private diaries cannot be the ground to confirm demands. He relied on the judgment rendered in the case of M.T.K. Gurusamy v. CCE, Madurai - 2001 (130) E.L.T. 344 (Tri. - Chennai). He submits tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase of CCE, Coimbatore v. Sangamitra Cotton Mills (P) Ltd. - 2004 (163) E.L.T. 472 (Tri. - Chennai). The learned Counsel submits that in view of lack of corroborative evidence by the investigating authorities, the demands are required to be set aside. 4. The learned SDR submits that the appellants had admitted the offence and they have paid duty on such admissions. Therefore, the demands are req ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red as a conclusive evidence for confirming the demands on the allegation of clandestine removal. Furthermore, on going through the submissions made by Shri G.V.S. Subramanyam, we notice that there are lot of discrepancies and contradictions. The authorities have not taken into consideration the explanation given by the appellants on this aspect of the matter. On an overall appreciation of the ent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
