Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2015 (6) TMI 777

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y the Revenue against the judgment and order dated 13-8-2003 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Northern Bench, New Delhi [2003 (158) E.L.T. 180 (Tri.-Del.). 2. The factual matrix lies in a narrow compass. The respondent-assessee is engaged in the manufacture of PTY Twisted Yarn falling under Chapter sub-heading 54.02 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (for brevity, 'the Act'). On the basis of intelligence received by the officers of Anti Evasion directorate that the assessee was indulged in evasion of central excise duty by resorting to undervaluation and clandestine clearances of PTY as it was clearing PTY from its factory gate at a very low value in the name of non-existing firms, while....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....were made through a broker and the invoice showed name of other buyers. 4. Because of the aforesaid perception, he repelled the stand put forth in the show cause. The Adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of certain sum as duty and imposed the penalty accordingly. 5. On an appeal preferred by the assessee, the Tribunal noted the observations of the Commissioner and recorded as follows : "4. We find that the learned Commissioner was fully justified in holding that there is no evidence brought out in the case by the Department to prove any flow back which would justify rejection of the invoice value. The Commissioner has observed that even though there is an allegation that time lag between the clearance date and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the contentions of the assessee and placed reliance on Punjab Oil & Silicate Mills v. C.C.E. [1993 (65) E.L.T. 268] and on the basis of this authority, took the view that there was no proof of undervaluation. The Tribunal further opined that though there was an allegation of undervaluation, yet there was no whisper of any evidence or pro-back additional consideration from the buyer to the manufacturer either directly or through any channel. The Tribunal noted the finding recorded by the Commissioner and thereafter proceeded to state thus : "7. In Punjab Oil & Silicate Mills, the Department while alleging clandestine manufacture and removal of the goods relied on the figures furnished by the assessee to the Department of Industries o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ut any corroborating evidence. In the light of the above authorities we hold that the Commissioner was justified in taking the view that undervaluation cannot be found against the assessees on the basis of bank statements." 7. At this juncture, we may profitably note that in certain cases, another Commissioner had accepted the similar submissions raised by the assessee as in the case of Beekaylon Synthetics v. Commissioner of C.Ex., Surat/Mumbai [2003 (158) E.L.T. 307]. The said order was assailed by the Revenue before the Tribunal and the Tribunal, on the basis of the reasoning which have been reproduced above, dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. 8. We have heard Mr. A.K. Panda, learned Senior Counsel along with Mr. Arijit....