TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 255X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent and private dairy entry of 3rd party i.e. of Sh. S.K. Pansari which contains the name of the appellant. The law as to whether the third party records can be adopted as an evidence for arriving at the findings of clandestine removal, in the absence on any corroborative evidence, is well settled. Only on the basis of statement of third party no demand could be made. Since the entire case of the Revenue is based upon the entries made in the records of M/s. Monu Steel without there being any corroborative evidence, the demand is set aside - As a result the penalty imposed on Sh. Mahesh Agarwal, Director is also set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. E/51420/51371/2018-EX ( SM ) - Final Order No. 524 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Rather he stated as under:- After seeing all the entries pertaining to my unit and satisfying myself I am affixing my signature on Annexure-A as a token of having seen and perused the same. I submit that we had not cleared/removed MS ingots through the said commission agent. Without issue of sales invoices or without payment of Central Excise Duty. No commission has been paid by us to the said M/s Monu Steels Raipur. 4. The finding of the ld. Principle Commissioner about the statement of Mr. Agarwal in para 3.5.12 of the impugned order is based upon the mis-interpretation of his following statement in which where Shri Mahesh Agarwal stated as under; I have seen and gone through the relevant records/registered/diaries reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manufactures i.e. M/s. Sh. Shyam Ingot and Casting Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Nutan Ispat Power Pvt. Ltd., Raipur, whose names were also found in the dairy recovered from Sh. S.K. Pansari proprietor of M/s. Monu Steel, accepted their irregularities and admitted the duty liability therefore no corroboration was required in those cases. But in the present case the appellant did not admit the liability and submitted that the Revenue has not adduced any corroborative evidence to show the movement of the goods from the premises of the appellant to the premises of any buyers or the customers nor they brought on record any evidence as to whose is buyers of the goods allegedly sold through M/s. Monu Steel. The ld. Counsel for the appellant also submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gs of clandestine removal cannot be upheld based upon the third party documents unless there is clinching evidence of clandestine manufacture and removal of the goods. 11. In an identical matter this tribunal vide its order dated 04.04.2018 in Appeal No. E/50526-50527/2018 SM titled as, Shree Consultants Pvt. Ltd Vs. C.C.E. S.T. Raipur set aside the demand which was also made only on the basis of the entries made in the records of M/s. Monu Steel and held as under: xxx xxx xxx 4. I find that the entire case of the Revenue is based upon the records recovered from M/s Monu Steels. Even in those records, the appellant s name has not been spelt correctly and it is based upon the statement of the representative of M/s Monu Steels ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eals are allowed with consequential relief to the appellants. Similarly this tribunal in the matter of Excise Appeal No. E/50874/2018-Ex [SM] M/s. Ashok Ispat Udyo Vs.Comm. of C.Ex., CGST, Raipur Excise Appeal No. E/50812/2018-Ex [SM] M/s. Vijay Chand Bothra Vs. Comm. of C.Ex., CGST, Raipur, set aside the demand since the same was based only upon the diary entries of Sh. S.K.Pansari proprietor of M/s. Monu Steel without their being any corroborative evidence. 12. Recently also this tribunal in a batch of matters being Appeal Nos. E/51117-51118/2018-SM and E/50940, 51236, 51241/2018 Arora (CG) Energy Steel P. Ltd., Vs. CCE ST Raipur vide common order dated 15.06.2018 set aside the demand since the entire case of the Revenue is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
