2020 (1) TMI 233 - AT - Central Excise

Clandestine removal - aluminium ingots - aluminium ingots arising out of aluminium scraps received when such scraps was sold on high sea sales basis - no corroborative evidences - HELD THAT - No contrary evidences have been placed by the Revenue to rebut the findings of the learned Commissioner - In the circumstances there are no reason to interfere with the findings of the learned Commissioner. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues: Alleged clandestine manufacture and clearance of aluminum ingots without payment of duty.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the Revenue against an Order-in-Original passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III, alleging that the respondent had manufactured and cleared aluminum ingots without paying Central Excise duty.

2. The Revenue contended that the aluminum scraps purchased by M/s. Vignesh Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Coimbatore, were diverted to M/s. Vijayshree Alloys (Pune) Pvt. Ltd. for manufacturing aluminum ingots clandestinely without duty payment. The Commissioner dropped the proceedings, leading to the Revenue's appeal.

3. The respondent argued that there was no evidence to suggest erroneous CENVAT credit availing or clandestine clearance of ingots. They contended that the OE manufacturers derived no benefit from any alleged clandestine activities.

4. The Tribunal analyzed the evidence and noted that there was no proof that M/s. Vijayshree Alloys (Pune) Pvt. Ltd. utilized the aluminum scraps for manufacturing ingots clandestinely. The Commissioner's order was upheld as there was insufficient evidence to prove the allegations.

5. The Tribunal emphasized that mere receipt of aluminum scraps by the respondent did not directly lead to the conclusion of clandestine manufacturing and clearance of ingots. It was highlighted that serious charges like clandestine removal require substantial evidence, which was lacking in this case.

6. Since no contrary evidence was presented by the Revenue to challenge the Commissioner's findings, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, deeming it devoid of merit.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, emphasizing the importance of substantial evidence to prove allegations of clandestine activities in excise matters.