Tribunal dismisses revenue's claim due to lack of evidence; High Court upholds decision

The tribunal found that the revenue failed to prove clandestine removal of goods by M/s Bihariji Manufacturing Pvt Ltd. and M/s Hindustan Silicate and Chemicals. It emphasized the need for concrete evidence and dismissed the duty demand, stating that allegations cannot be based on presumptions. The High Court upheld the tribunal's factual findings, leading to the dismissal of the appeal under Section 35 G of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

---

---

Issues Involved:
The judgment involves the issue of clandestine removal of goods and the demand for central excise duty from two parties, M/s Bihariji Manufacturing Pvt Ltd. and M/s Hindustan Silicate and Chemicals.

Clandestine Removal of Goods:
The Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal found that the revenue failed to prove that fully manufactured goods were removed from the premises of the mentioned parties. The tribunal emphasized the requirement of positive evidence to establish clandestine removal, stating that it cannot be based on presumptions or suppositions. It was noted that no material was presented to support the revenue's claim that the goods were manufactured and sold through a specific individual. The tribunal concluded that without concrete evidence, the charge of clandestine removal could not be upheld, leading to the dismissal of the duty demand and the non-liability of the seized goods for confiscation.

Legal Considerations:
The High Court, after examining the impugned order, determined that the tribunal's findings were factual and did not raise any substantial question of law for consideration. Consequently, the appeal under Section 35 G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was dismissed.

This summary highlights the key aspects of the judgment, focusing on the issues of clandestine removal of goods and the legal considerations leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

---