Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2022 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (9) TMI 64 - CESTAT NEW DELHIRectification application - mistake of fact, apparent on the face of record or not - Clandestine Removal - demand based on printouts taken from the computer at the factory premises itself during the course of search - HELD THAT:- On mere perusal of computer printouts (RUD – 8), it reveals that the same is a calculation chart prepared by the Department. This is also clarified in para-4.5 of the show cause notice. It is found that the demand of Rs.3,03, 41,494/- is not based on relied upon document and such demand has been raised based on the calculation chart prepared by the Department. Admittedly, the printouts allegedly recovered, on which ld. Authorised Representative wants to place reliance at this stage, are not part of RUD. Further, there is no certificate to such printouts, as required under Section 36B of the Act, in absence of which, the data retrieved from computer is not reliable as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ANVAR P.V VERSUS P.K. BASHEER AND OTHERS [2014 (9) TMI 1007 - SUPREME COURT]. There is no merit in the ground taken for rectification by Revenue. It is further found that the panchnama dated 3rd July, 2014, which the ld. Authorised Representative wants to rely upon, at this stage, has neither been relied upon in the show cause notice nor the same was placed before the Tribunal or argued at the time of hearing of the appeal. This panchnama is also not referred in the Rectification Application filed by Revenue. There is no mistake in the final order of this Tribunal - rectification application dismissed.
|