Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 1021 - AT - Central ExciseClandestine manufacture and removal - it was alleged that appellant were clandestinely receiving texturized yarn from M/s DPPL, and after dying the same and sent it back to M/s DPPL, Silvassa - allegation based on record of the Godown Keeper of M/S Purohit Clearing Agency - whether all goods cleared are recorded in register of Purohit Clearing Agency and are dyed yarn? - Held that: - unless Revenue is able to establish that the entire yarn listed in Register 28and 31 is dyed yarn no case can be made against the appellant. In this respect, the sole evidence relied upon by Revenue is statement of Birbal Singh. Thus, it is imperative that no reliance on the said statement can be placed as no cross-examination has been granted. Revenue has alleged that appellant have manufactured about 8.11 lakhs kgs. of dyed yarn - In the absence of cross-examination of the officer, it would be incorrect to rely on the said report to counter the claim of the appellant that their production capacity is much lower than the alleged production. It was also alleged that All these dyed yarn is manufactured by M/S DTPL, Tarapur and supplied to M/s. DPPL, Silvassa - Held that: - there is barely any evidence to support the allegation that M/s DPPL, Silvassa, had supplied this quantity of yarn to M/s DPPL, Tarapur, and received back the dyed yarn from DTPL, Tarapur - Revenue has relied upon the statement of Security Personnel who had joined barely 8 days before his statement was recorded. Revenue is seeking to rely on his statement for period long before he had joined the organization. In these circumstances the statement of the security supervisor cannot be relied. Revenue has failed to substantiate the allegations on numerous counts - Demand has to be set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|