TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 88X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that adjudicating authority has found such practice of issuing copper pipes for remelting was in vogue during the period April 2007 to September 2007. There is no evidence like seizure of clandestinely removed imported copper pipes or extra raw material acquired by the main appellant for manufacturing higher diameter copper pipes/tubes. The statements of the Chairman and Authorised signatory of the main appellant also do not say anywhere that the imported copper tubes have been diverted clandestinely. Though the initial statement of Shri Sanjay Mardia recorded by the investigation team convey that he was not able to properly convey as to how imported copper tubes were dealt, but it is well settled law now that few statements, which are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ound that the imported pipes were diverted from the factory premises of the main appellant and the credit was taken with respect to the imported pipes was not admissible. Ld.Advocate argued that the only reason with the Department for such allegation is that diameter of the pipes sold by the main appellant was more than the imported pipes which cannot be achieved by the process of drawing. It was his case that due to market fluctuation of prices in copper the imported pipes were melted to make pipes of higher diameter/dimensions. He made the Bench go through the raw material records maintained by the main appellant to drive home the point that imported pipes were cleared internally for re-melting to make higher diameter pipes. He also made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gued for complete waiver of the confirmed demands and penalties. 3. Shri K. Sivakumar (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that though the entire imported pipes were received by the appellant but the pipes manufactured by the appellant were of higher diameter than the imported copper pipes which cannot be made by drawing of imported pipes. That Shri Sanjay Mardia Chairman of the main appellant in his statement dt.15.5.2008 could not give any satisfactory answer for 249.227 MT of imported copper pipes and admitted that this quantity was neither lying in stock nor sent to the job workers. That similarly Shri Ajay Nirmal, Authorised signatory of the main appellant could not explain the shortage found in imported copper pipes. It w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ptember 2007 (prior to the period involved in the present proceedings) in Para 41.15 of the OIO dt.21.11.2013. This finding of the adjudicating authority gives credence to the stand taken by the main appellant that imported pipes were remelted to make pipes of higher dimensions. There is no evidence like seizure of clandestinely removed imported copper pipes or extra raw material acquired by the main appellant for manufacturing higher diameter copper pipes/tubes. The statements of the Chairman and Authorised signatory of the main appellant also do not say anywhere that the imported copper tubes have been diverted clandestinely. Though the initial statement of Shri Sanjay Mardia recorded by the investigation team convey that he was not able ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
