Just a moment...

Report
ReportReport
Welcome to TaxTMI

We're migrating from taxmanagementindia.com to taxtmi.com and wish to make this transition convenient for you. We welcome your feedback and suggestions. Please report any errors you encounter so we can address them promptly.

Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Report an Error
Type of Error :
Please tell us about the error :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home /

2000 (12) TMI 672

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....truck was carrying steel ingots. On verification, it was found that the appellants made two clearances and no duty was paid on these clearances. The driver of the truck, in his statement, admitted that he also taken the steel ingots to the godown of M/s. Gupta Jee & Sons without payment of duty and the goods were unloaded in front of the godown. Steel ingots were also found in front of the godown of M/s. Gupta Jee & Sons. The ingots taken into possession. During the verification, 4.220 MTs of steel ingots were found in excess to their statutory record. These goods were also taken into possession. During the investigation, it was also found that 71.135 MTs steel ingots were removed without payment of duty and these goods were cleared by the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....decision in the case of M/s. Balls and Cylpebs Ltd. v. C.C.E. reported in 1997 (92) E.L.T. 496 (Tribunal) = 1996 (1) RLT 560. In respect of duty on 71.135 MTs. of steel ingots, the submission of the Counsel is that the demand is only based on entries made in the octroi record. He submits that there is no evidence is on record to show that the consignments mentioned in the octroi record, have been delivered to the customers. His submission is that in absence of any corroborative evidence, the demand is not sustainable. He, therefore, submits that the appeal be allowed. 4. Heard ld. D.R., who reiterates the findings of the lower authorities. 5. In this case, the appellants admitted the ownership of the trucks, in question and also....