9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Excise dated 31.12.2003, was allowed by the impugned order. The Revenue urges that the CESTAT by its impugned order fell into error in not confirming the duty of Rs. 84,92,243/- imposed on the assessee/respondent and a penalty of like amount. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee was at the relevant time manufacturing stainless steel ingots, which was classifiable under chapter 72 of Central Excise Tariff Act. The Excise Inspector visited the factory on 22.07.1996 and on checking the goods reported that stainless steel ingots involving the duty component of Rs. 19,46,649.38/- was found but not accounted for and that the corresponding shortage of 576.785 MTs of the goods was noticed. 3. Subsequently, the Anti Evasion Branch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Industries and should have itself independently taken note of the statement of Sanjay Jain, who was not cross examined despite an opportunity given by the Revenue to the assessee in that regard. The Revenue also relied upon the statements of other individuals who are Directors of the assessee, i.e., Hemchand Jain, Swaran Kumar Jain and Vinod Kumar Jain. 7. This Court notices at the outset that the Tribunal wilfully relied upon its conclusions in the case of other assessee, i.e., D.P. Processors Pvt. Ltd. The relevant extract of that order - reproduced in the impugned order - is as follows: - "7. After going through the present impugned order and the Tribunal"s decision in the case of D.P. Industries, we find that as recorded in para 5 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thout payment of duty. The basis for the charge is the documents namely Dharamkanta slips recovered from Shri Hem Chand Jain. When the Dharamkanta Slips indicate the details of lorry number, nothing prevented the departmental officers in investigating the matter further by locating the buyers of the flats. There is no evidence that the appellant firm actually cleared the flats without payment of duty. In order to manufacture flats, first raw materials namely the ingots should be received. Since, the source of ingots in the present case is M/s. D.P. Processors Pvt. Ltd. and also M/s Ambeecee Consolidated Enterprises, there should be evidence that the above units produced ingots which were not accounted for and sent the same to the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
