2017 (4) TMI 325

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by Shri Om Prakash Agarwal. The officers of Directorate of Central Excise Intelligence conducted certain investigations with the suppliers of M.S. Ingots viz. M.S. Steel Abrasives Industries Ltd., M/s. Hanumant Ingots Pvt. Ltd., Raipur. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that the main appellant herein (M/s. Sindh Ispat) have received unaccounted M.S. Ingots/Risers and manufactured M.S. Angles out of such unaccounted raw materials and paid them without payment of duty. Proceedings were initiated against the appellant and the partner to demand and recover central excise duty on such unaccounted manufacture and clearance and to impose various penalties. The allegation is that the main appellant received 48.390 Mts. of M.S. Ing....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....anufacture and clearance. Further, the record of third party regarding supplies of ingots and the statement of suppliers cannot be held against the appellants. The statement given by the partner of the appellant firm, Shri Om Prakash Agarwal cannot be relied upon as the same was recorded by the officers and the admission therein is not on free will of the deponent. Ld. Counsel for the appellant relied on the various decided cases to reiterate that uncorroborative third party evidence cannot be the sole ground to sustain the case of clandestine manufacture and clearances. 4. I have perused the impugned orders carefully. 5. I note that in both the proceedings almost identical set of facts were involved. The allegation was that bas....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the appellant that the suppliers maintained such records only to falsely implicate the appellant. In fact, the supply of unaccounted raw materials has been corroborated by the partner of the appellant's firm. In such situation, it is not tenable for the appellant to, now in the appeal stage, raise the point by requirement of cross-examination, etc. Admittedly, none of the private records or the statements given have been retracted or later contested for their authenticity. In the appeal before the Tribunal, the appellant is making a belated assertion that the statement by the partner of the appellant-firm is not voluntary. Various case laws relied upon by the appellants are not of any support in the present case. In the cases involving ....