2015 (12) TMI 1265

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") claiming the following substantial questions of law:- (i) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal is justified in rejecting the appeal of the Department without discussing the arguments put forth in the grounds of appeal duly supported by relevant citations of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India & Tribunal? (ii) Whether the department is expected to prove the case of clandestine removal with mathematical precision even after gather enough primary evidence like the statements of 15 parties (out of 31 parties) whose name figured in the private diary resumed from the party evidencing unaccounted transactions of dyed fabrics indicating clandestine removal and voluntary admission by the party....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rics with the appellant. A show cause notice dated 27.4.2005 (Annexure A-1) was issued to the appellant for recovery of Rs. 23,26,594/- as excise duty along with interest and penalty. The Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 11.12.2006 (Annexure A-2) confirmed the demand along with interest and also imposed penalty of equal amount on the appellant. However, no penalty was imposed on 15 parties on the ground that there was no allegation that they had acted in collusion with the appellant. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide order dated 22.10.2007 (Annexure A-3) allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the Adjudicating Authority. Being aggrieved by the order, Annexure A-3, the rev....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in para 5 of the order that on going through the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), I find that their dyeing master Shri Harbans Lal during the course of adjudication had accepted that the entries made in the diary belonged to him and were relating to his business transactions. The Tribunal further observed that the Commissioner (Appeals) also took into consideration the retraction made by the appellant by way of sending telegram and that the appellants have no capacity to manufacture such a huge quantity of poly fabrics. The Tribunal by merely observing that the learned Advocate for the assessee had placed on record the number of decisions laying down that entries made in the private note book read with statement cannot be held to be evi....