9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 1118X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . It was also indicated that in the intelligence that for the manufacture of unrecorded quantity of snuff, the appellant is purchasing tobacco through one M/s. Roshan Lal Pawan Kumar, it was indicated that in actual, the tobacco is unloaded at Giddarbaha directly at the factory of the appellant and used in manufacture of snuff which is sold without payment of duty. Acting on the said intelligence, various premises were searched, the records were seized and statements various person were recorded, namely, Sh. Roshan Lal and Sh. Pawan Kumar of Roshan Lal Pawan Kumar, who stated that they were engaged in the retail business. Their gross sale is being less, they approached Shri Vikash in 2007-08 through their relative residing in their neighborhood who the relative of Sh, Amar Nath. As they were poor people, they agreed to purchase tobacco for Sh. Amar Nath, in return, they were receiving commission @ 10% of bill amount. All the purchases were made on the direction of LDAN as actually they were not placing any order of any material. M/s LDAN was purchasing the tobacco in their name and sale was shown to M/s LDAN. On the basis of statement of Roshan Lal Pawan Kumar and various statement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ized signatory of the firm then it is not understood than how his statement has been relied upon to demand duty of such huge amount from the appellant. 6. He further submits that the cross examination of Shri Pawan Kumar was fixed on many dates on which the appellant and their advocate were present but Shri Pawan Kumar did not appear on those dates for cross examination. Lastly, when Sh. Pawan Kumar appeared on 25.09.2014 for cross examination, Shri Vikash Grover, partner of the appellant was present on the said date and categorically mentioned that since the mother of Counsel was hospitalized and Shri Vikash Grover on behalf the appellant sought adjournment but the Adjudicating Authority has disallowed the same and the matter was decided without giving any opportunity of cross examination. In that circumstance, the statement Sh. Pawan Kumar cannot be relied upon. 7. Further, the cross examination of Sh. Roshan Lal is contrary to the statement given during the investigation and there is no evidence on record and for procuring raw material by the appellant. He further submits that apart from tobacco, other ingredients are also required for manufacture of snuff. None of the supplie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n retail. The whole of the material was procured by the appellant and they were given cash to make payments in cash/drafts in the name of the suppliers. 12. She further submits that as regards seizure of 25 bags from M/s. Jitendra Enterprises, Khandwa on 29.1.2010, Shri Ghanshyam Mohani, in his statement stated that they had taken the delivery of 25 boras on the instruction of Shri Harish Sachdeva of Shree Balaji Traders. Further, on enquiry with the Railway Parcel office, it was found that the said consignment booked on 21.1.2010 at their Bathinda office was declared as Mehandi by a Neeraj Kumar in the name of Sh. Satish Kumar Khandwa. Both the said persons were found to be fictitious. Further, 43 consignments of snuff/Mehndi were found to have been booked from Bathinda and Ferozepur railway stations for Khandwa in the name of fictitious firms during investigation. Therefore, in view of above these reasonable doubts which they failed to rebut the same. She relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of D. Boormull-1983 (13) ELT 1546 (SC) to say that once the department casts a reasonable doubt, it is for the respondent to answer the allegations. Accordingly, she s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... requested to arrange his advocate till the office hour on 25.09.2014 so that they could conduct cross examination of Shri Pawan Kumar. He was also informed that in case fails to conduct the cross examination, no further opportunity shall be allowed since the cross examination of Shri Pawan Kumar was earlier also fixed on two different dates. The said Shri Vikash Grover was persuaded by the adjudicating authority to conduct the cross examination. When he expressed his total inability to do so, the examination-in-chief of Shri Pawan Kumar was conducted in the presence of Shri Vikash Grover and a copy of the proceedings drawn was handed over to him under his proper receipt. During the examination-in-chief of Shri Pawan Kumar stated that he had tendered his statement dated 08.02.2010 before the DGCEI officers without any duress or pressure and that his statement was factually correct the best of his knowledge and belief. In view of these depositions of Shri Pawan Kumar, I am convinced that the position was not going to change even if the advocate of the noticee would have conducted the cross examination of Shri Pawan Kumar. As all these proceedings were conducted in the presence of Shr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Kumar. Q.No.5 Were you authorized to tender statement to any govt. department on behalf of the said firm? Ans. Since I was looking after the entire work of the firm, I gave the statement. I have no specific permission to do so from the proprietor of the firm. Q.No.6 In what business the said firm was engaged? Ans. The firm was engaged in the business of purchase and sale of Raw Tobacco. Q.No.7 Did the said firm had any business with M/s Baldev Raj & sons, Mukatsar. Have you ever supplied material to them? Ans. We have supplied Raw Tobacco to M/s Baldev Raj & sons Mukatsar. Q.No.8 Who were the main suppliers of Raw Tobacco to M/s Roshan Lal Pawan Kumar, Mallgodown Road, Mukatsar? Ans. The main suppliers of Raw Tobacco were M/s Shri Traders, kaimganj (UP), M/s Ishaq Tobacco Store Kaimganj (UP), M/s Styanarain Aggarwal & Co., Kaimganj (UP) etc. I don't remember at present the exact type of raw tobacco received from these firms. Q.No.9 Do you have any business relationship with M/s Lachchman Dass Amarnath, Giddarbaha? Ans. Yes, I issued all the bills through cash to unknown persons as adviced by Sh. Jagdish, an employ of M/s Lachchman Dass Amarnath, Giddarbaha. Q. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... " 17. We find that during cross examination of Shri Roshan Lal, Sh. Roshan Lal has retracted his own statement and the Revenue has relied on cross examination. In the statement, during investigation, Shri Roshan Lal stated that they were not procuring any goods and the goods were procured by the appellant whereas during the cross examination, he stated that they were engaged in the purchase and sale of raw tobacco. He also admitted that he is not the authorized person to give statement on behalf of M/s Roshan Lal Pawan Kumar whereas Shri Pawan Kumar in his statement stated that his father is correct. During the examination, he also mentioned the name of one Shri Jagdish, who used to give commission @2% in cash. Shri Jagdish used to supply the cash and the purchase documents on behalf of the appellant. Shri Roshan Lal in his statement stated they have not sold raw tobacco to the appellant and he admitted that they supplied raw material to other parties in open market whereas in his statement during investigation he has stated that he is procuring entire goods on behalf of the appellant. The entire case is based on the statement of Sh. Roshan Lal and Sh. Pawan Kumar against the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
