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 →

CST, Delhi - I Versus M/s Mayfair Industries

2016 (5) TMI 1072 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Un-sustainability of the charge of clandestine removal of excisable goods against the respondent - Held that:- While statements given before the excise officers are admissible evidence, the contents of such statements should clearly bring out the nature of offence with specific details which can be cross verified also. In the present case specific details and such cross verification and corroboration is lacking. Mere payment of some amount during investigation by itself cannot be held as admissi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ndent : Shri B.L. Narsimhan and Vipul Agarwal, Advocates ORDER Per. B. Ravichandran :- The appeal by Revenue is against order dated 02/11/2006 of Commissioner (Appeals), Delhi I. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of plastic parts for motor vehicles liable to Central Excise duty. Certain search and enquiry operations were carried out by the officers in August 2000 on the premise that the appellants have evaded payment of Central Excise duty on the goods cleared by them. The searches .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Jain, Manager of the appellant firm. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order set aside the original order and allowed the appeal filed by the appellant and two others. Aggrieved by this order, the Revenue is in appeal. 2. The learned AR elaborated on the grounds of appeal to state that the respondent indulged in clandestine clearance of excisable goods and this fact has been brought out during the investigation with corroborated evidences. He contended that the impugned or .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rding reason for the expert opinion has not been recorded. The comparison of signature should be on the basis of specimen signature which was not taken. 4. The statements of various persons given under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 brought out the modus operandi adopted by the appellant for clandestine removal of goods. The clandestine removal of goods has been established by the recovery of parallel invoices and fictitious challan issued under Rule 57F (4). The learned AR relied on .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

which he has applied for patent in 1996 itself. The learned Counsel submitted that it is not clear from the show cause notice that how the Department came in possession of the alleged parallel invoices said to be in the custody of Shri J.B. Singh. There is no Panchnama or other evidence for recovery of these invoices from Shri J.B. Singh or his residence. In view of business rivalry allegations were made against the appellant with the help of the alleged parallel invoices in possession of Shri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rought out regarding the genuineness of the so called parallel invoices and about signature on these invoices. The learned Counsel further submitted that deposit of ₹ 5 lakhs made by the respondent during investigation did not establish the clear clandestine clearance. Finally, it is the case of the respondent that the charge of clandestine removal cannot be sustained only on the basis of documents recovered from third parties who are antagonistic to the business activities of the responde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s recovered in the premises of an ex-employee, certain challans for clearance to job work, statements of ex-employee, job worker and two buyers of the finished goods. Perusal of the impugned order indicates that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) had examined all the evidences available on record before arriving at his decision. Regarding statement of Shri Dev Jain and Shri Yogesh Jain he recorded that these were not categorical and specific. The finding in the impugned order with reference to t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

recovered from any of the premises of the respondent. The impugned order questioned the circumstances of recovery of such invoices as there is no Panchnama for the same. The assertion made by Shri J.B. Singh that the said invoices were handed over by various drivers could not be corroborated as none of the drivers were identified. It is seen that the impugned order examined in detail the contents and the bonafide nature of these invoices and came to the conclusion that the alleged parallel invo .....

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