Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Sahiba Fabrics Pvt Ltd and Others Versus Commissioners of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax-SURAT-I

2015 (10) TMI 275 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

Clandestine removal of goods - Clearance of goods without payment of duty - officers seized the various records and documents including a diary written by Shri Surjeet Singh - Held that:- After the search of the factory premises of the said Company, the Central Excise Officers issued Summons to examine the eight merchant manufacturers, who had refused to appear before the Officers. The Learned Authorised Representative submitted that the Department initiated criminal proceedings against the eigh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

10720/2015 - Dated:- 11-3-2015 - Mr. P.K. Das and Mr. H.K. Thakur, JJ. For The Appellant : Sh. K.K. Anand Advocate For The Respondent : Sh. G.P. Thomas Authorised Representative Per: P.K. Das These appeals are arising out of a common order, and therefore, all are taken up together of disposal. 2. The relevant facts of the case in brief, are that M/s. Sahiba Fabrics Pvt Ltd ( hereinafter referred to as the said Company ) was engaged in the processing of ManMade Fabrics (hereinafter referred to as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

said Company in his statement dated 06.08.2003 accepted the statement of Sh. Mustak Ahmd A. Makrani and deposited a sum of ₹ 10 lakhs. The officers also seized the various records and documents including a diary written by Shri Surjeet Singh. The Central Excise Officers recorded various statements and issued Summons to eight merchant manufacturers, for causing appearance. Criminal proceedings were initiated against the eight merchant manufacturers for refusing the Summons. 3. A Show Cause .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on Shri Brijmohan Gujar, Director of the said Company and also imposed penalties on the eight merchant manufacturers. 4. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, we find that the main contention of the Learned Advocate is that the adjudicating authority during the adjudicating proceedings allowed cross-examination of Mr. Vikramrao Patil and Sh. Mustak Ahmed A. Makrani. But no finding was given by the adjudicating authority on the cross-examination. The Learned Advocate submits .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

after the search of the factory premises of the said Company, the Central Excise Officers issued Summons to examine the eight merchant manufacturers, who had refused to appear before the Officers. The Learned Authorised Representative submitted that the Department initiated criminal proceedings against the eight merchant manufacturers for refusal of the appearance. However, we find that the Adjudicating Authority had not given any detail finding on the outcome of cross-examination. The said Com .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version