TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (9) TMI 85
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....acts and evidence of the present case and also applying the ratio of the judicial pronouncements as discussed hereinabove, the order passed by the Hon'ble Tribunal in setting aside the duty demand of Rs. 79,39,162/- and subsequently setting aside/reducing the various penalties imposed on the respondent, its Directors and employees is legally correct or otherwise? 2. The short controversy involved....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t there is a dichotomy between the two statements. In such a situation where difference between two statements would seriously affect the duty liability of VAPPL, the Department should have obtained corroboration from the merchant manufacturers who allegedly got the goods processed without payment of duty by paying job charges as above. There is no independent evidence to establish that VAPPL had ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd of Rs. 79,39,162/- has been calculated, were with the Department on 25.11.1998 and his statement was immediately recorded. The statement of Shri Sushilkumar Poddar was also recorded immediately thereafter and therefore, when the Officers visited the premises of the merchant manufacturers and recorded their statements, they were already in the possession of diaries, and the statements of Shri Jh....