Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 1250 - AT - Central ExciseDuty demand - Clandestine removal of goods - Held that:- There is no evidences at all which have been recovered from the appellants regarding any alleged clandestine removal.There is also no confessional statement from the appellants in this regard.The entire impugned demand has been confirmed and penalties imposed merely on the basis of incriminated documents recovered from M/s. Monu Steel. In the case of Rutvi Steel & Alloys Vs. Commissioner Central Excise, Rajkot [2009 (7) TMI 231 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD] the CESTAT held that entries in the diary of a third party are insufficient to sustain clandestine removal. In this case also, there is no evidence on record to confirm the demand except the incriminating documents recovered from M/s. Monu Steels.Therefore, relying on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Rutvi Steel & Alloys (supra), the allegation of clandestine removal is not sustainable. Consequently, the demand confirmed in the impugned order is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee.
|