TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 957X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order - appeal allowed by way of remand. - E/1283-1285/2010-EX[SM] - FINAL ORDER No. 56853-56855 /2017 - Dated:- 23-8-2017 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Judicial Member Present Shri Hemant Bajaj, Advocate for the appellant Present Shri Kannu Verma Kumar, DR for the respondent ORDER Per Ashok Jindal: The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order demanding duty alleging clandestine removal of goods along with interest and equivalent amount of duty and imposition of penalty on all the appellants. 2. The brief facts of the case are that M/s. Ahuja Battery Covers are engaged in the manufacture of PVC battery separator and were not registered with the Central Excise Department as they were availing SSI exemption i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the quantum of production of the final product from the machines. b) The modus operandi of payments made / accountal, c) The transport and storage of raw material d) The transport of finished goods e) Obtaining the raw materials through imports / indenting agents and local procurement and attempts to quantify the raw material obtained locally / imported, tabulated in charts f) Alleged modus operandi of fictitious firms, non raising of bills / invoices g) Private records h) Statements recorded 8.2 Quantification of raw material While tables have been prepared tabulating the data of purchases / import / indent of the raw material, battery separator grade PVC resin, the quantification / calculation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly worked out on the basis of all the entries in the ledger being treated as of PVC battery separators. There is a large body of case law on clandestine manufacture and removal. Each case has to be considered on its merits. The totality of facts and circumstances has to be considered in any case for which a speaking order is necessary. To illustrate 1) in the case of A. Ravindran vs. CCE Pondicherry 2006 (203) ELT 515 (Tri-Chennai) the charge was of clandestine production and removal which case was remanded for a de novo adjudication with the observation Adjudication is a process involving careful application of mind to each and every piece of evidence adduced by both sides 2) In Ruby Chlorates (P) Ltd. Vs. CCE, Trichy 2006 (204) ELT 607 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 003 (160) ELT 323 (Tri-Kol) in view of the non speaking order the case / matter were remanded for passing a speaking order. 5. The said order of the Ld. Commissioner (A) has not been challenged by the Revenue before this Tribunal or any other higher forum. Therefore, the said directions of the Ld. Commissioner (A) are binding on the Revenue and in the remand proceedings those directions have not been followed by the authorities below. In these circumstances, impugned order deserves no merits. Accordingly, the same is set aside. As in remand proceedings the directions of the Ld. Commissioner (A) given by the order dated 18.05.2007 has not been complied with. Therefore, the matter is remanded back again to the adjudicating authority firs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
