Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2014 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (9) TMI 961 - AT - Central ExcisePenalty u/s 11AC - Clandestine manufacture and removal of their final products - Held that:- Date of visit of the officers in the appellants factory, there were admitted excesses and shortages being of near about Rs. one crore of value of the materials. The recovery of loose papers led the revenue to believe that the appellant was indulging in clandestine activities. The subsequent development of the recording of all statements of Director of the company as also of their key employees as also of the author of the entries, during the course of investigations clearly lead to only one fact that appellants after recording of the statements admitting clandestine activities, was retracting the same mechanically. After each retraction, the Director as also Shri Dubey, in his subsequent statement again admitted clandestine activities. Such repeated retractions, have rightly held to be infructous and of no consequence by the adjudicating authority. Infact I find that the final statement of the said deponents have not been retracted at all. Department has not simplicitor relied upon the statement of authorised representatives. Repeated statements of various persons stand recorded after each and every retraction. Further, the statement of Shri Dubey, admitting clandestine removal stand corroborated by Shri Manoj Kumar Jain, Director of the appellant as also by Shri Raghunandan Aggarwal and two supervisors of the company. Not only that, even the Director of the customers company M/s. Vardhman Cables has also in his initial statement, admitted having received the goods without payment of duty. No doubt the outcome of cross examination has to be given due importance but keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case including the fact of alleged excess and shortages detected at the time of visit of officers, and the fact of deposit of duty, has to be taken into consideration which lead only to one and one fact of clandestine removal of the appellants final product - Decided against assessee.
|