TMI Blog2008 (9) TMI 217X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has imposed penalties upon the other appellants. We have heard both the sides duly represented by Sh. S.S. Sekhon, Adv., Sh. R.V. Shetty, Adv., Sh. Vipin Jain, Adv., Sh. Vishal Agarwal, C.A. for the parties and Shri Sameer Chitkara, SDR for the Revenue. 2. As per facts on record, M/s. Laxmi Impex is an 100% EOU engaged in the manufacture of suiting, shirting, dress materials and sarees in terms of the LOP granted by the Jt. Development Commissioner, Kandla Free Trade Zone, Kandla. Their factory was visited by the officers of Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence (DGCEI) on 10-5-2002, who conducted various checks and verifications. It was noticed that the said appellant was de-bonded on 10-4-2002 and was no longer enjoying the status of a 100% EOU. During the course of search, records maintained by the said unit during the ordinary course of their business as also some other documents pertaining to M/s. Shree Shyam Syntex and M/s. United Enterprises were also recovered. Statements of various persons were recorded and further investigations were made, on the basis of which show cause notice was issued alleging that the two proprietary firms i.e. M/s. Shree Shyam Syn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M/s. Laxmi Impex as fictitious and dummy firms. The said findings of the Original Adjudicating Authority stands assailed by the appellant on the grounds of violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as full access to the seized documents was not provided to the appellant during the course of adjudication. The adjudicating authority has simply gone by the statements recorded during the course of investigations without considering the retractions made by the proprietor. By drawing our attention to a letter dt. 3-2-2005 written by the Dy. Director of DGCEI, while responding to the request of the appellant for supply and inspection of seized records, it stands contended that the officers were not only coercing the proprietor to sign on the dotted lines of the statement and charts put up to him but were also threatened to proceed against the appellant under Section 228 of the Indian Penal Code. For better appreciation, we reproduce the para-2 of the said letter. "2. In this context you are requested to visit this office with prior appointment to inspect the records in this office and identify the records, whose photocopies are required by you. However, it is pointed out here ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant's case beyond doubt. As against the above contention, Ld. SDR has submitted that bills of weaver were never placed before the Original Adjudicating Authority and as such the same cannot be made the basis for arriving at a finding in favour of the appellants. In any case, submits the Ld. SDR that the bills are doubtful nature as bills of earlier date have a later bill number. Reference in this regard was made to the bill issued by M/s. Waqar Textiles. He also submits that submission of bills at this stage denies the Revenue a chance of verifying the authenticity of the same. Shri Sameer Chitkara has also pleaded that the bills in question are issued by weavers in Bhiwandi, who do not have the latest technology of weaving the fabric on Suzular Technology. 6. After considering above submissions and after going through the impugned order, we find that the said bills of job work produced by the appellant do not stand considered by the adjudicating authority. Without going into the aspect whether the same were placed by the appellants before him or the same stands produced before us now, we are of the view that inasmuch as the same are crucial evidence to the dispute in que ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plicable in the present case. On this issue also we are of the view that matter needs to go back inasmuch as the said submissions do not stand considered by the adjudicating authority. 8. By drawing our attention to the documents placed on record, the Ld. Advocate tried to establish that one of the DTA unit i.e. M/s. PSL, who allegedly sent the raw material to the appellant for conversion into grey fabrics, subsequently exported the same. The attention was also drawn to the statement of Sh. Pravin Dave of M/s. PSL, one of the 14 entities admitting that the goods manufactured were further got processed from one M/s. Anant Syntex others and brought back to their factory wherein it was cut into various sizes and exported. The waste cuttings like rags and chindis were cleared on payment of duty. This statement would show that the officers have not completed the enquiries into the final disposal of the grey fabrics woven on job work by the 14 entities and have not found out as to whether the goods allegedly manufactured by M/s. Laxmi Impex on job work basis were, further exported by the sender of the raw materials or not. Inasmuch as the matter is being remanded, we expect the Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
