Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2020 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (1) TMI 542 - AT - Central ExciseClandestine removal - allegation that the appellant had received huge amount of inputs i.e. aluminium wire rods, on which they have availed Modvat credit but, however, they have not accounted the final products which could be manufactured from the said inputs - corroborative evidences or not - HELD THAT:- In the entire proceedings, no evidence, much less corroborative evidence, has been adduced to show that input goods have been procured to manufacture goods for clandestine clearance. No evidence for extra production or unaccounted cash or statement of buyers or transporters has been obtained. It is a settled legal position that charge of clandestine clearance is a serious charge and the onus to prove the same is on the Revenue by adducing some evidence - The Tribunal has taken consistent view that in absence of corroborative evidence, the charge of clandestine clearance cannot be levelled against the assessee. The whole basis of applying the input output ratio of 1:1 to arrive at the quantity of final products alleged to be clandestinely cleared by the appellant is solely based on the production pattern of other assessee in the same Commissionerate - the learned Commissioner made a fundamental error in making such assumption to raise demand on the allegation of clandestine clearance. In the instant case, no shortages of goods were ever found which fact is on record and not in dispute. In any case, since the whole basis of allegation of clandestine removal is the production pattern of other assessees, which has no legal or scientific basis, the impugned duty demand cannot be sustained. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|