Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (10) TMI 1172 - AT - Central ExciseClandestine removal - assessee contested the SCN mainly on the basis that the details mentioned in FORM A were not the actual figures of import and consumption, which were prepared for getting higher import quota - principles of natural justice - Held that: - the party has nothing in their defence and they are deliberately adopting delaying tactics by asking investigation report which has neither been relied upon by the department in fastening the duty liability nor it is available with the department. As far as the principles of natural justice are concerned, it would be seen that ample opportunities had already been given to the party and that matter cannot be continuously adjourned to suit their convenience. Anyone taking the plea of natural justice should come with clean hands. Unfortunately, that does not seem to be the case here. The entire case of department is made out on the basis of information found available in Form A, whereas the DGFT and even the Income Tax Appellate Authority has already concluded that there was no such improper import by the appellant. Further, on four occasions this Tribunal gave opportunity to the department to substantiate its case by bringing on record the investigation carried out by DGFT. The lower authority in the impugned order has shown total disrespect to the remand directions. At the same time, when said information was brought on record by the appellant, the lower authority has refused to go by the same, whereas once the DGFT had given clean chit to appellant, the lower authority was bound to drop the demand. Even otherwise the entire case of department is made out on mere surmises and presumptions - it is a settled legal position that the charge of clandestine removal cannot be made without there being corroborative evidences - demand set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|