1992 (6) TMI 132

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....st the orders passed by the adjudicating authority in adjudication Order No. DIB/DIV/ CE/8/84, dated 18-10-1984. In terms of that order the adjudicating authority held that the appellants are liable to pay duty on 29 bags of urea, seized in this case, as they were removed from the factory without payment of duty. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 16-1-1983 at 16-00 hrs the Officers of the Central Excise checked the stocks of tea chest in the non-duty paid stock-room of M/s. Jaypur Timber & Veneer Mills Pvt. Ltd. They could only produce the cash memo issued by M/s. R.K. Traders, Dibrugarh, showing purchase of 5 MTs of urea. They also stated that the urea seized is the balance of this purchase. The Departmental Officers could not ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....was also stated that there is no proof to show that the appellants have cleared this particular urea in question without payment of duty. It was his contention that the burden is on the department to prove that the appellant had cleared the goods clandestinely without payment of duty in violation of Rules 9(2) and 55A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. But the learned S.D.R. Shri Saha contended before us that the urea in question was seized from the premises of M/s. Jaypur Timber & Veneer Mills and they were found in bags which were marked as Hindustan Fertilisers Corporation Limited. He also stated that the urea being industrial grade should have been cleared on payment of duty. It was his contention that M/s. Jaypur Timber & Veneer Mills ....