TMI Blog2008 (9) TMI 251X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is not evidence that seal actually broken prior to 4-4-2000, seal broken in February itself would be on basis of assumptions and presumptions, demand raised for February and March, 2000 is set aside by extending benefit of doubt – further, nothing on record to prove involvement of buyers in breaking of seal, penalty on buyer not imposable - E/342-348/2005 - A/1954-1960/2008-WZB/AHD - Dated:- 12- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ficers on 7-2-2000 and the seal was found to be intact. 3. The appellants subsequently vide their letter dt. 25-4-04 addressed to Assistant Commissioner requested for opening the seal. Accordingly, their factory was visited on 26-4-2000 and it was found that chambers were already opened and were in running condition. Statement of Shri Kishor M. Bindal, Partner was recorded wherein he admitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f first visit of the officers when the seal was found to be intact and 26-4-2000 when the second visit was made by the officers and seal was found to be broken. As such, proceedings were initiated against the appellant by way of issuance of show cause notice proposing confirmation of demand for the period February and March 2000. The said demand stand confirmed by the authorities below along with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the processing unit. The only question is as to when the same was broken. Shri Bindal, Partner, in his statement agreed that seal was broken by them on 4-4-2000. Against the above admission of Shri Bindal, there is no other evidence on record that the seal was actually broken prior to 4-4-2000. The demand for duty for the month of April 2000 stand paid by the appellant and the dispute only relate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 10,000/- each on other appellants who are the buyers of the fabrics is not called for inasmuch as there is nothing on record to show their knowledge or involvement in breaking of the seal by the processing unit. Admittedly, the same processing unit was working under compounded levy scheme and the buyers were not required to verify duty payment particulars in respect of each and every consignmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
