TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (4) TMI 775
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iri Paper Enterprises Pvt.Ltd., Shri Y.P.Kawatra of M/s.Himgiri Paper Enterprises Pvt.Ltd.And Shri Joginder Kumar Kawatra of M/s.Himigiri Paper Enterprises Pvt.Ltd. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on the basis of investigation, it was alleged that M/s.Kawatra Papers Ltd (KP) is involved in the clandestine removal of paper to M/s.Himgiri Paper Enterprises Pvt.Ltd. (HP) during the period 1.4.1994 to 31.3.1997. To establish these charges, the documents which were relied upon as under:- (a) records showing despatch by HP to different customers during the period 1.7.94 to 7.7.97 (b) records showing receipt of paper by HP during the period 1.7.1994 to 7.7.1994 (c) Stock register maintained by HP during the period 1.1.1995 to 7.7.1997 (d) challans issued on the letter head of HP for the period 1995 to June,1997, for which there was no corresponding invoices (e) one page from a file, containing figures on the left hand side and right hand side, signed by a director of KP, for the month of June, 1997, of which the figures on the left hand side tallied with the RG-1 register maintained by KP but the figures on the right hand side did not tally, and (f) prod....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o follow the procedure prescribed in section 9D of Central Excise Act, 1944. To support this, he relies on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Swiber Offshore Construction Pvt.Ltd. vs. CC-2014 (301) ELT 119 (T). He further submits that the adjudicating authority has arbitrarily rejected the report of Institute of Paper Technology. He submits that the adjudicating authority has not examined the machine log sheets when it was specifically directed to examine in depth. Therefore, the impugned order is required to be set aside. 5. On the other hand, learned AR supported the impugned order and submits that in this case, corroborative statements and documents recovered during the investigation proved the charge against the appellants. Moreover the appellant was engaged in the activity of clandestine removal of the goods in the guise of clearance to HP and the same was corroborated by the statements of Shri Jagdish Verma, Shri Satish Sharma and Shri Gopal Singh Rawat which have been accepted by the Shri Joginder Kawatra. Therefore, the impugned orders are required to be upheld. 6. Heart the parties and considered the submissions. 7. In the earlier round of lit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e adjudicating authority has held that remand order of this Tribunal should be harmoniously construed and read ejusdem generis with the words capacity of the mills and machine log sheets , would not include the plea for cross examination and as such this plea was not available to the appellant in the remand proceedings. It was also held that cross examination was not an absolute right, and it was open to the adjudicating authority to rely on the statements without allowing cross examination. It was also held by the adjudicating authority that private records also established the allegation and he did not rely on the report of the Institute of Paper Technology for consideration capacity of the mills. He also observed that the machine log sheets are fabricated/manipulated. 10. On limitation, he has held that the decision of Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Nizam Sugar Factory vs. CCE, Hyderabad-1999 (114) ELT 429 (Tri.-LB) is not applicable as the earlier show cause notice was issued on specific evidence collected prior to issue of first show cause notice and second show cause notice was issued on the basis of further inve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....proceeds, whether by cheque or by cash, of such goods by the manufacturers or persons authorised by him; (f) use of electricity for in excess of what is necessary for manufacture of goods otherwise manufactured and validly cleared on payment of duty; (g) statements of buyers with some details of illicit manufacture and clearance; (h) proof of actual transportation of goods, cleared without payment of duty; (i) links between the documents recovered during the search and activities being carried on in the factory of production; etc. 12. The Tribunal after relying on the principle hereinabove has held that inference can be drawn on the clandestine clearance merely on the basis of notebook which are properly maintained or on mere statements of some the persons may be even from responsible official of manufacturers or even its director/partner who are not permitted to cross examine and thereafter held charge of clandestine removal is not sustainable. 13. In this case charge of clandestine removal has been alleged against the appellants on the basis of certain records and statements of some persons relied upon were not allowed to be cross examined rema....