2017 (11) TMI 736

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2011 and 17/2011 on 17.08.2012 framed following substantial questions of law: "i. Whether the voluntary statements rendered under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act by the authorized signatory/technical adviser of the assessee Company are not admissible in evidence and cannot be relied upon merely because the same were retracted subsequently by way of a telegram sent by the department? ii. Whether the CESTAT has not erred in remanding the matter with the directions to redetermine the duty only in respect to those goods which on test of Central Revenue Control Laboratory (CRCL) were found to be cross reel hank in the facts and circumstances of the case wherein it is admitted that for the entire period of dispute the same ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vidence taken by the Commissioner (Appeals) and original Assessing Authority. 5. However, counsel for the respondents has relied upon the decision of Tribunal, wherein it has been observed as under:- 5.3 The revenue relies upon the statement dated 04/10/01 of Shri R.B. Tiwari, the Technical Supervisor of the appellant's factory, wherein he has stated that the machinery installed in the Appellant's factory was capable of manufacturing cross reel hank yarn and that the factory was indeed manufacturing cross reel hank yarn but this statement was immediately retracted by him vide telegram dated 05/10/01 addressed to the Commissioner. A retracted statement can be relied upon as evidence if only it is corroborated by other independent....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... wrong to conclude that throughout during the period from 1996 to 2001 the Appellant company produced only cross reel hank yarn. Therefore while, the stock of yarn found in the factory premises at the time of the officer's visit to the factory on 27/09/01 and the stock of yarn found in the premises of M/s Komal Synthetics which on test by the CRCL was found to be cross reel hank yarn, can be treated as cross reel hank yarn, the findings of these tests cannot be applied to the other clearances. Tribunal in a series of judgment in cases of Kiran Spinning Mills, Bombay vs. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay reported in 1988 (33) E.L.T. 137 (Tri. - Del.), Pattani Chemicals vs. Collector of Central Excise reported in 1991 (56) E.L.T. 253 (Tri. ....