9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 1023X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly stated facts relating to these applications are that during the income tax survey conducted on 27-8-2009, concealed income of Rs. 1 crore from the appellant firm was detected. Appellant in order to avoid any litigation deposited advance tax on the aforesaid income and declared it in the balance sheet as partner's capital account. Excise Department on coming to know this fact asked the appellant firm to explain aforesaid undeclared income and recorded statement of Shri Varinder Mehndiratta partner. He in his statement under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act explained aforesaid income of Rs. 1 crore in following manner. "Ans. The income of Rs. 10.00 lacs shown as difference of valuation of stock has been shown due to wrong calculation. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of pre-deposit of duty demand and penalty has been moved. 4. Shri ld. Counsel for the appellant has submitted that impugned order has been passed without any rational basis on the premise that undeclared income of Rs. 1 crore of the appellant firm detected by the Income Tax Authorities was the result of clandestine removal of goods without payment of excise. Ld. Counsel further submitted that perusal of the record would show that the Department did not conduct any investigation to find out whether or not there was excess production of excisable goods by the appellant firm during the period in dispute or whether the appellant firm received raw material in excess that shown in the record or any evidence indicating transportation of goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Department explained that concealed income was the result of sale purchase of property but the appellant failed to give any evidence to substantiate this allegation, instead the appellant submitted a letter indicating that they do not have any documentary evidence to substantiate their plea of having generated income from the sale purchase of property. It is further pleaded that Commissioner has rightly relied upon the statement of partner of the appellant firm because he did not retract his statement made to the income tax authorities. Thus it is pleaded that this is not a fit for waiver of condition of pre-deposit. 6. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the material on record. On perusal of the show cause notice as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
