Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (5) TMI 710 - AT - Central ExciseClandestine removal - M.S. Billets - entire case of the Revenue is based upon the entries made on the loose slips recovered during the course of visit of the officers read with the statement of the authorized Signatory, Shri Shankey Goyal and the shortages detected in the stock of final products. HELD THAT:- The statement of the authorized signatory stands retracted subsequently and has also not been tested upon the touch stone of the cross examination and examination-in-chief. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Jindal Drugs Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India [2016 (6) TMI 956 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT] has held that the statement, which has not been cross-examined and examination in-chief, has to be kept out of consideration. It is well settled law that the allegation of clandestine removal is required to be uphold on the basis of the clinching evidence requiring proof of purchase of various raw materials, use of extra electricity, sale of final products, clandestine removal, transportation, payment , realization of sale proceeds, mode and flow back of funds - Inasmuch as in the present case, the Revenue’s entire case is solely based upon the scribbling made in the recovered loose papers, without there being any evidence of actual manufacture and removal of the final products, there are no reasons to uphold the findings of the clandestine removal. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|