9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 139X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the respondent-company could have purchased the raw materials from the market and might have used the same in the manufacture of ingots, was absolutely based on assumption and presumption. It is absolutely a settled principle of law that on the basis of presumption, no adverse conclusion is possible. The onus is on the Department to prove the clandestine manufacture and removal of the goods from the factory. There was no evidence of clandestine manufacture and removal of the goods from the factory. Only some rough note-books were found by the Investigating Officers, which did not reflect the actual production of their factory. The Department has also failed to prove as to whether there was sufficient evidence to prove that power consumpti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... did not show the correct figures of production. The respondent-company has vouched for authenticity and correctness of both the figures at different fora. So, it cannot be said that the production figures shown in RG-I Register are correct and the figures entered in the Production Register for Bank , are not correct. 2.1. The most clinching evidence is the pattern of power consumption. As per the production norms furnished by the assessee to the adjudicating authority, 590 units of electricity are required for the manufacture of 1 M.T. of final product, whereas the assessee has shown a figure of 1000 units of electricity for production of 1 M.T. of their final product. The assessee has tried to show it as extra energy consumption to the ext ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its that the appeals filed by the Revenue may be dismissed. 4. I have perused the records along with the impugned Order. The Commissioner (Appeals) has observed in his Order as follows :- Further, admittedly the appellant unit was running and its consumption pattern of electricity was not something that the department unearthed on the date of search. If at all the electricity consumption ratio to production is alleged to have been misdeclared by the appellant, it is for the department to prove the contrary with cogent evidence on record. I find that it is not legal on the part of the lower authority to simply ward off consumption ratio declared by the appellant with the observation that it was overloaded. Similarly, the lower authority had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onus is on the Department to prove the clandestine manufacture and removal of the goods from the factory. There was no evidence of clandestine manufacture and removal of the goods from the factory. Only some rough note-books were found by the Investigating Officers, which did not reflect the actual production of their factory. The Department has also failed to prove as to whether there was sufficient evidence to prove that power consumption per tonne was based on evidence or records seized from the appellants or was based on any experiment conducted in the premises of the respondent-company. I find in the present case that neither there was a norm of consumption of power nor was there any evidence in the form of private records seized, nor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
