TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 169X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry premises of the appellant. Besides, this document which is termed as booklet and no other evidence is coming forth from the record to hold that there was clandestine removal of the finished goods. In the absence of any other evidence more specifically positive evidence establishing evasion and the absence of any other material reflecting purchase of excessive raw material, excess consumption of resources, the demand of clandestine removal fails miserably. The charge of clandestine removal of the goods on the main appellant and consequent penalty on the Director does not stand scrutiny of the law and the demand needs to be set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Central Excise Appeal No.1356, 1357, 1365 of 2010- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... process of law confirmed the demand raised against the main appellant alongwith interest and also imposed penalty on the individual as well as main appellant. The adjudicating authority also imposed penalties on the individual. On appeal filed by the appellant, the first appellate authority upheld the order-in-original as against the demand of duty alongwith interest and imposed penalties but extended the benefit of discharge of penalty @ 25% of the confirmed demand to the main appellant. Revenue is aggrieved by such benefit extended by the first appellate authority. 4. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant-Assessee took the Bench through the entire case records and drew my attention to the statements of various individual. He would more specifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her corroborative evidence has been brought on record. It is his submission that judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of C.C.E., Vs. Saakeen Alloys Pvt. Ltd, - 2014 (308) ELT 655 (Guj.) would directly apply in the case in hand and it is his further submission that the decision in Saakeen Alloys Pvt. Ltd., has been upheld by the Apex Court on Special Leave Appeal filed by Revenue after condoning the delay in filing the Appeal. He would also rely on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Suntrek Aluminium P. Ltd. Vs. C.C.E. C.Ex S.Tax, Rajkot - 2013 (288) ELT 500 (Guj.) for the same proposition. 5. Ld. A.R. for the Revenue refers to the entries made in the private booklet seize ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtage of finished goods; confessional statement of one Shri Sharma. Both the lower authorities have placed their findings that these record only to lead that there was clandestine removal of the goods. 7. On perusal of the private records or private booklets I notice that these were indicating some figures. Specimen copy of the documents in PDF is reproduced. It can be noticed from the above reproduced specimen of the booklet that entries did not indicate that they were of 2001. The dates indicated wherein only states the date and month. On deeper perusal of the statement recorded of all the individuals i.e. Shri Sharma, I find that he has not admitted that this booklet is pertaining to the year 2001. He has only stated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere was clandestine removal of the finished goods. In the absence of any other evidence more specifically positive evidence establishing evasion and the absence of any other material reflecting purchase of excessive raw material, excess consumption of resources, the demand of clandestine removal fails miserably. The investigating authorities have failed to take investigation to the logical end, and failed to bring on record any evidence of transportation and there is no evidence of purchasers. I rind strong force in the submission made by the Id e Counsel that the ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Saakeen Alloys and Suntrek would clearly apply in the case in hand. Respectfully following the same, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
