TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 769X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Hemant Bajaj, Advocate, for the Respondent. ORDER Revenue is in second round of litigation. Tribunal by order dated 2-2-2009 had sent the matter back to the ld. Appellate Authority to consider the issue involved afresh. While remanding the matter in para-3 of the order, the Tribunal observed that statement of Shri Ashwani Kumar and Shri Manoj Kumar were material which required a combined reading with the statement of Shri Ashwani Kumar and Shri Manoj Kumar. Only upon evaluation of the evidence recorded from them, ld. Appellate Authority was directed to dispose the Appeal upon remand. Ld. Appellate Authority following the direction of the Tribunal by order dated 12-7-06 examined the issue and found that cross-examination of Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary that was found in the course of investigation and question No. 3 was put as exhibited by statement dated 4-1-2002 from him he has also agreed about his involvement in the deal and also he has agreed to be an employee of M/s. Paradise Steel. Therefore principal grievance of Revenue is that Rs. 1,45,000/- collected by Shri Manohar Lal on behalf of Shri Ashwani Kumar and Shri Manohar Lal on account of sale made to M/s. Patran Pipes by M/s. Paradise Steel brings all the Appellant to the fold of law. Accordingly, cross-examination shall not provide any support to the Appellant to escape from the clutches of the law. When the statement recorded from Shri Naresh Joshi, one of the partners of M/s. Paradise Steel established the vital link of Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Manoj Kumar nor from M/s. Patran Pipes to bring a live link about the deal of goods whether flowing from M/s. Paradise Steel. Record does not reveal whether this amount of Rs. 1,45,000/- was due from M/s. Patran Pipes prior to date of the seizure of the cash i.e., 29-11-01. There is no contrary evidence of Revenue against sources of Rs. 1,45,000/- explained by M/s. Ashwani and Manoj Kumar brought out in Adjudication. Invoices if any issued by M/s. Paradise Steel in favour of M/s. Patran Pipes showing sale of goods, if any, made by the former to the later are not in record. Of course, sale without invoices have been brought to record while controversy is on the recovery of cash of Rs. 1,45,000/- from a third party. Cogent evidence show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
