TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 536X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble items within exempted limits. The adjudicating authority has observed that the report of Anti-Evasion Wing does not dispute this inasmuch as they have not come with a segregated calculation of duty liability. It appears that the Respondent had produced the Chartered Accountant Certificates of each year, certifying that it was prepared on the basis of the books of accounts, records and documents produced for their verification - the Chartered Accountant Certificate cannot be brushed aside, unless there is any proof of material in support of the contention made by the Revenue. The other aspect of this matter is that the Respondent had claimed S.S.I. Exemption and the accounts were maintained for other purposes like Sales Tax, Servi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ements of the representative of the respondent. Thereafter, show cause proceedings were initiated, proposing demand of Central Excise duty of ₹ 1,50,66,615/- along with interest and also to impose penalty for the period 2003-04 to 2007-08. It has been alleged that the Respondent did not consider the value of clearance of other furniture and parts thereof and wood continuously shaped , while computing the S.S.I. Exemption limit and, thereby evaded payment of Central Excise duty. Vide the impugned order dated 12.03.2010, the adjudicating authority has observed that the show cause notice is not sustainable and accordingly, dropped further proceedings arising out of the said notice. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order, Revenue ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of appeal. The learned Advocate further submitted that on the identical issue for the earlier period, the Commissioner has also dropped the show cause proceedings. The learned Advocate has referred to the decision of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Suntrek Aluminium P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus., C.Ex. S.T., Rajkot-2013 (288) E.L.T. 500(Guj.) and decision of this Tribunal in the case of High Polymers P. Ltd. Vs. C.C.E. 2002 (140) E.L.T. 134 (T), to submit that there is no substance in the appeal filed by the Revenue against the impugned order. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. 6. In this case, Revenue has filed the appeal on a limited issue that the break-up submitted by the Respondent did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accounts were maintained for other purposes like Sales Tax, Service Tax etc., which were audited by the Chartered Accountant as per the statutory provisions. Hence, there is no force in the grounds of appeal filed by the Revenue. The Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Suntrek Aluminium P. Ltd. (supra) on an identical issue, have allowed the appeal by observing as under:- 6.8 It was further noticed that the failure on part of the appellant to produce accounts was in course of the process of investigation. The assessee s case was that it was maintaining the register and the entries wore being made therein about receipt and clearances of goods and the same was produced at the time of personal hearing but the authority reje ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
