2005 (2) TMI 205

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g the correctness of OIA No. 187/2002-C.E., dated 10-4-2002. The appellants were importing steel scrap and availing the concessional Customs duty as per Notification No. 83/1990-Cus., dated 20th March 1990. On 17-3-1996 the Divisional Preventive Unit Palakkad during the course of road checking intercepted and seized a lorry load of Steel melting scrap totally weighing at 6050 Kgs. destined to M/s. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... leged clandestine removal of the scrap in terms of the said statement of the lorry driver. Therefore the counsel for the appellants submits that the Commissioner having confirmed demand on the quantity of 77.125 MTs on the mere statement of the lorry driver that he had on earlier occasions cleared goods is unsustainable and cannot be relied. On such statements demand cannot be confirmed. He submit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt of duty. As noted from the impugned order there is no further investigation made by the Revenue with regard to him. The said goods were cleared and no statements were recorded from the said purchasers. The statement of a lorry driver is vague and cannot be considered. There are no particulars of trip sheets and other details required to corroborate his statement. The benefit of doubt with regar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X