TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 802X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court in the case of K.I. Pavunny Vs. Asst. Collector, Cochin [1997 (2) TMI 97 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ] has held that “confessional statement, if found voluntary, can form the sole basis for conviction”. Needless to say that the vigour of evidence required in quasi-judicial proceedings is lower than the rigour required for conviction. As regards the contention that the amount should be treated as come duty price on the basis of the judgement of Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Delhi Vs.Maruti Udyog Ltd (2002 (2) TMI 101 - Supreme Court ), find that in that case the goods had been cleared against proper central excise invoices while in the instant case goods were cleared without. In the present case, the goods were cleared without iss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the firm; and that the Katcha parches prepared for dispatch of such goods were handed over by him to his employers. Both the partners in their statements admitted to clandestine clearances of goods without payment of duty under various Katcha parches recovered during search of the factory and residences. The worksheets prepared in the form of Annexures A and B on the basis of the evidence found regarding such clandestine clearances without proper invoice were also shown to Mr. Rakesh Luthra who voluntarily accepted them as having been correctly prepared. Mr. Rajan Luthra also accepted the details given in Annexures A and B as well as Annexure C wherein the computation of the duty evaded based on the details in Annexures A and B was show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atements of the partners categorically and fully establish the impugned evasion. There is no allegation that the statements are not voluntary and they had never been retracted. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.I. Pavunny Vs. Asst. Collector, Cochin [1997 (90) ELT 241 (SC)] has held that confessional statement, if found voluntary, can form the sole basis for conviction . Needless to say that the vigour of evidence required in quasi-judicial proceedings is lower than the rigour required for conviction. As regards the contention that the amount should be treated as come duty price on the basis of the judgement of Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Delhi Vs.Maruti Udyog Ltd (supra), I find that in that case the goods had been clea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
