TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (7) TMI 170
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Tribunal has committed substantial error of law in allowing appeal of the respondent with consequential reliefs on the ground that no corroborative evidence has been put forth by the Revenue even though the Revenue has proved illicit removal of 85889.290 kgs. of polyester texturised yarn valued at Rs.64,25,197/- without entering in Central Excise records, without cover of Central Excise Invoices and without payment of central excise duty equal to aggregate of customs duties by placing evidence in form of statement of Chairman, Director and authorized signatory of the Unit recorded under Section 14 of Central Excise Act, 1944 and under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962? (B) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Trib....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y to decision of the Tribunal, referred to in para containing grounds of memo of this appeal in various cases on like issue ?" Tax Appeal 1412 of 2009. "(A) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has committed substantial error of law in allowing appeal of the respondent with consequential reliefs on the ground that no corroborative evidence has been put forth by the Revenue even though the Revenue has proved illicit removal of 85669.290 kgs. of polyester texturised yarn valued at Rs.64,25,197/- without entering in Central Excise records, without cover of Central Excise Invoices and without payment of central excise duty equal to aggregate of customs duties by placing evidence in form of statement of Chairman....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m Policy. That the respondent unit had procured 82027.279 Kgs of imported polyester yarn duty free under Notification No.53/97-Cus and 3642.011 kgs of Anti Static Oil duty free from DTA units and other 100% EOUs under CT-3 procedure for the said purpose, but the unit neither exported or disposed of the goods manufactured from the said polyester filament yarn and Anti Static Oil, that is Texturised Yarn in accordance with the Exim Policy. According to the appellant, Anti Static Oil used in the manufacture of polyester texturised yarn increases the weight of the finished product vis-a-vis raw materials used, whereas actual clearances made by the respondents was equal to the weight of the raw materials consumed, leading to the conclusion that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Tribunal it had been contended on behalf of the respondent assessees that the assessees were clearing polyester texturised yarn after dyeing and that during the process of dyeing and twisting, the Anti Static Oil which was attached to the polyester texturised yarn gets removed. Hence, there was no oil gain as wrongly calculated by the adjudicating authority and accordingly, there was no evasion of duty. It was the case of the assessees, that opinion of the Chartered Engineer was submitted before the adjudicating authority but the same had not been considered. It was also pointed out that the Director, Chairman and the purchase officer had not admitted any clandestine removal. 6. The Tribunal after appreciating the evidence on record,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the circumstances, it is apparent that when the Anti Static Oil gets removed during the aforesaid process, there would not be any increase in the weight of the finished material. Insofar as the admission on the part of Shri Modi, the authorised signatory is concerned, a perusal of the order of the adjudicating authority clearly indicates that it was the case of the respondents that Shri Modi used to always create problems for their unit and that they had a strong suspicion that he even used to steal from their unit. That, in this connection there was a bitter argument so he had turned revengeful and after landing them in all these troubles, he had left their service. Thus it is apparent that the Tribunal has taken into consideration all th....