TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1571X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed were false and described vehicles were not registered with the Transport Authority? - Held that: - When the appellate Commissioner found that there were falsification of records and appellant has no material to discard the allegation of Revenue, he held that there was clandestine clearance of the goods and there was neither any job working done nor any job worked goods cleared. We are not able ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aterials were sent to the job workers for conversion into plain reel yanks and whether there was job working really done and goods were whether cleared in the guise of plain reel yank yarn. Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) found that there was plethora of evidence to hold that mode of transport was bogus and fake documents were created to cause prejudice to Revenue. This comes out from paras-6.1 and 6.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the purchase invoices by Jaiser Spintex (P) Ltd. revealed that they received/purchased only cone/cheese yarn and not hank yarn. The hank yarn is not usable as such in the power loom sector and only cone/cheese yarn is usable as such in the power loom sector. As per the particulars available in Goods Vehicle Record/Account note book of Driver [Trip sheet] and in-passes raised by the yarn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny loading/unloading/freight charges relating to job work undertaken by them. * Sri K.Arunachalam, Proprietor of M/s.Balamurugan Doublers stated that he did not raise labour bills to the appellant no.1, as they did not ask for the same. * The buyers have made voluntary depositions that they received cone/cheese yarn along with invoices in which the description was mentioned as hank yarn. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Court in the case of CCE Chandigarh Vs Modern Alloys 2010 (258) ELT 364 (P H) and the judgement of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Alagappa Cements Pvt. Ltd. Vs CEGAT Chennai - 2010 (260) ELT 511 (Mad.). We are also conscious that any grant of relief to the evader shall be a bonus to him following the judgement of the Hon'ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh in the case of C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
