TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 341
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... with Rule 26. It stands brought to my notice by the Ld. Advocate that Shri S. Rangasamy has since expired and his death certificate is also filed on record. In that event, the appeal filed by Shri S. Rangasamy stands abated in terms of Rule 22 of CESTAT Procedural Rules. 2. As regards the appeal filed by M/s. Selvapathy Mills Pvt. Ltd., I find that the said appellant is engaged in the manufacture of cotton cone yarns. As per records, the appellant s factory was visited by the Central Excise Officers for annual stock taking on 05.12.1998 and no discrepancy was found. Thereafter, stock taking was undertaken on 27.11.1999, without detecting any discrepancies. The Preventive Officers also undertook the stock taking in the appellant s factory ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion limit. He was also shown the records of the two units Shri Deivam Sizing Mills as also Shri Ganapathy Sizing Mills wherein he deposed that sometimes yarn bags were delivered at the sizing mills as per the request of the buyers and he is not in a position to show the invoices for all yarn received by the said two units as he is unable to show the invoices showing clearances of all the yarn. 4. On the above basis proceedings were initiated against the appellant alleging clandestine removal of the yarn during the period 98- 99 and 99-2000. The said proceedings resulted in confirmation of duty vide impugned order of the original adjudicating authority, which stands upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeal. 5. After ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n cleared from their factory, without payment of duty, he is ready to pay the duty. Apart from the fact that confessional statements cannot be adopted solely for arriving at the clandestine removal findings, I find that the said statement of Shri S.Rangasamy cannot be held to be confessional statement, in strict sense, in as much as there is no acceptance of the fact that they were indulging in clandestine activities. Further, Revenue has not examined the scribe of the entries made in the receipt book of the sizing mills, on the basis of which the entire case of the Revenue is made. Further, there is no incriminating documents or statements of any of the representatives of the three units, through whom the yarn has been sent to the sizing u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs Pvt. Ltd. - 2013 (287) ELT 243 (Guj.), and the Tribunal decision in the case of CCE, Ludhiana Vs. B.T. Alloys - 2013 (297) ELT 387 (Tri.-Del.). By applying the ratio of the above decisions to the facts of the present case, I find that the findings of the lower authorities are based upon the surmises and conjectures and there is virtually no evidence produced by the Revenue to establish clandestine removal against the assessee. It is also to be noted that during the relevant period the appellant s factory was put to stock taking, by the officers themselves, not once but three times and no discrepancies were found either in the raw materials stock or the final product stock. In such a scenario, the appellants cannot be held to be indulgin....