TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1108X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed is to meet the yardstick of proof beyond reasonable doubt while in quasi judicial proceedings it is to meet the yardstick of “preponderance of probability” only. However, there is force in the contention of the appellant that during the period when evasion took place Section 11AC ibid had not been enacted and therefore, penalty under Section 11AC cannot be imposed. We find that Section 11AC came in force on 28.09.1996 while period involved in this case falls within 1994-1995. Therefore, penlaty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is not attracted in this case. - Excise Appeal No. E/3044-3045/2006-Ex[DB] - Final Order No. 51334-51334/2016 - Dated:- 31-3-2016 - MR. S.K. MOHANTY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. R. K. SINGH, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... overed during the investigation which were made part of RUDs enclosed with the SCN. The Director of the appellant in his statement has clearly admitted that the appellant was manufacturing wire and cleared some of it without payment of duty clandestinely. The Director also admitted the computation of the impugned duty thus evaded. Whether the process amounted to manufacture is not the matter of dispute in this case inasmuch as the Director admitted that the appellant was manufacturing wire. At no stage during investigation or during adjudication by the primary adjudicating authority. The Director or the appellant contended that the impugned goods were not manufactured by it. The appellant was also availing of the cenvat credit on inputs w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manufactured out of wire rods. Indeed, as stated earlier, this plea was never taken by the appellant during investigation or during the adjudication process at the primary or first appellate authority level. 8. We have noticed that in the present case, the statement of the Director of the appellant assessee was never retracted and is indeed supported by the documentary evidences collected during the investigation. In the case of K.I. Pavuney vs Astt. Collector Cochin [2002-TIOL-739-SC-Cus.-L.B., Supreme Court held that confessional statement, if found voluntary can form the sole bases for conviction. Needless to say that for conviction the level of evidence required is to meet the yardstick of proof beyond reasonable doubt while in quas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
