2006 (12) TMI 423

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er examining the records and hearing both sides, we find that the demand of duty is purely based on statements. Some of the statements were recorded from buyers/brokers. Two statements were recorded from the Managing Director of the appellant-Company, one on 16-11-1998 and the other on 24-12-1998. The Managing Director's statements were confessional in nature as regards the suspicion of the department that cotton yarn had been clandestinely removed during the above period. It is claimed by the appellants that these statements were retracted the very next day through not a rised affidavits which were sent to the departmental authorities under Certificate of Posting. In the circumstances, according to the ld. Counsel for the appellants, there....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d 16-11-1998 and 24-12-98 should have been considered to have been duly retracted. Thus ld. Counsel claims prima facie case against the demand of duty and penult. Ld. SDR opposes this claim and reiterates the findings recorded by the authorities. 3. After giving careful consideration to the submissions, we note that there was no seizure of goods from the premises of any buyer or broker; no discrepancy was found between the stock of goods in the appellants' factory vis-a-vis RG 1 record. As  noted by the Joint Commissioner in his order, demand of duty is purely based on statements of buyers/brokers. After considering the circumstances in which such statements were recorded, we are inclined to doubt the reliability of these state....