9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 169X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red a Nokia mobile phone and Rs. 1,100/-. The SSB officials handed over the intercepted person along with recovered goods to Motihari Customs. The Customs officers recorded the statement of Shri Sujit Kumar on 20.04.2014 and 21.04.2014 where he stated that the seized gold was given to him by Shri Chandreshwar Prasad, brother of Shri Gopal Prasad. By a letter dated 10.05.2014 Shri Gopal Prasad addressed to the Commissioner of Customs, Patna claiming ownership of the gold. It is stated that the said gold biscuits were purchased by him from M/s Bhawana International, Chandni Chowk, Delhi on 14.04.2014. A Show Cause Notice dated 19.09.2014 was issued to Shri Sujit Kumar, Shri Gopal Prasad/Shah and Shri Chandreshwar Prasad/Shah. The adjudicating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mar as recorded on 20.04.2014 and 21.04.2014. It has also proceeded on the basis of the statement of proprietor of M/s Bhawana International and discarded the purchase documents as placed by the appellant. 5. I find from the impugned order that Shri Sujit Kumar was intercepted by the SSB officers on 19.04.2014. Subsequently, SSB officers handed over Shri Sujit Kumar and the seized material to the Customs Officials, Motihari. Shri Sujit Kumar, in his statement dated 20.04.2014 and 21.04.2014, stated that the seized gold biscuit was given to him by Shri Chandreshwar Prasad/Shah. The gold was scheduled for delivery to Shri Mahavir Shah/Prasad in his shop M/s Shakuntala Jewellers at Bakergunj, Patna. It is also stated that both Shri Chandreshw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner of Customs. In absence of the sanction order, the ld. Economic Offence Court cannot take cognizance. I find that the investigating officers recorded the statement of Shri Shambhu Prasad Sharma, proprietor of M/s Bhawana International, where he stated that he has not sold the said seized gold. Shri Shambhu Prasad was shown photographs of the seized gold where he denied and reiterated that the said gold bars were not sold to Shri Gopal Prasad/shah by him. On perusal of the retail invoices, dated 12.04.2014 and 14.04.2014, I find that the goods were sold under the description of gold bars . They have paid output VAT of 1% on the selling price. The company s VAT TIN and PAN have been mentioned. The investigating officers had shown ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... retail invoices produced by the appellants in so far as VAT registration No., PAN No. and VAT payment of M/s.Bhawana International. It has merely proceeded on the basis of the statement recorded by the jurisdictional Customs/Central Excise officers of M/s.Bhawana International. It is noted that the said officers had merely recorded the statement of the proprietor of M/s.Bhawana International and no attempt was made to confront the evidence namely retail invoices of M/s.Bhawana International produced by the appellant. Therefore, the purchase documents as produced by the appellants cannot be discarded on the basis of the statement, without any verification of the content of the retail invoices. I find that in such similar situation, the Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l these inputs, particularly LAB and Soda Ash were being used by them for their final products. Some of these declarations which are on record as Annexure A (Collectively) show that at least for seven final products, LAB and Soda Ash were used as inputs, besides other inputs enumerated in the description of inputs in the declarations dated 22-2-1999, 3-4-2000, 12-4-2000, and 12-6-2000. It is not disputed that the returns were regularly filed and the fact that these inputs were used for the final products was mentioned from the very inception in the declarations made and the returns filed by the assessee before the Revenue authorities." 8. The other aspect of this matter that the appellant produced the stock Register showing the receipt of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of law arose for consideration before the Hon'ble High Court and for no other purpose. Therefore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had not decided the matter on merit. In any event, I find that in the said case Revenue contended that the Banks letter referred to invoices dated 25.10.1999 and in such circumstances, the question of effecting delivery by the Bank to the authorised dealer under delivery challan dated 23.10.1999, which is prior to the date of invoice is not credit worthy. It is also contended by the Revenue that the Tribunal proceeded on the basis of normal trade practice and ignored the evidences. The facts of the said case is not applicable in the present case. In this case, the appellant produced the retail invoices of M/s.Bhawa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
