Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2022 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (1) TMI 72 - HC - CustomsClandestine removal - Charge Chrome - reliable evidence or not - Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the ratio of 1:1.3 taken from charge chrome to charge chrome slag manufactured by the assessee was not established by the Department? - HELD THAT:- The Court is inclined to concur with the CEGAT that the Department proceeded on surmises and conjectures to allege there was clandestine removal of Charge Chrome by the Respondent and that this was based merely on the ratio of production of Charge Chrome to Charge Chrome Slag for FACOR. It was not based on the actual figures pertaining to the Respondent’s production of Charge Chrome and Charge Chrome Slag over a period of time. As rightly pointed out by the CEGAT, the quality of the ore and the type of machinery used are relevant since no two units might use the same type of ore or machinery. To simply extrapolate the production figures of one company to determine whether there has been a suppression of production figures by another may neither be a safe or a reliable method of determining what should be the acceptable ratio of production of Charge Chrome and Charge Chrome Slag. The CEGAT was justified in holding that the ratio 1:1.3 for production of Charge Chrome to Charge Chrome Slag manufactured by the Assessee was not established by the Customs Department - the Court answers the question framed in the affirmative - reference disposed off.
|