2018 (2) TMI 277

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....), Appeal No.E/1357/2010 is filed by individual Shri Vimal Kumar Agarwal and Appeal No.E/1365/2010 is filed by Revenue. All three appeals are directed against the same order-in-appeal, they are disposed of by a common order. 3. The relevant facts that arise for consideration in these three appeals are that main Appellant M/s Viveklene Industries Ltd. was running an independent textile process house was visited by the Central Excise Officers on 15/16.9.2001 and records were drawn with Panchnama. The documents included private booklet, transport document; on stock verification there was shortage of grey fabrics vis-`-vis records; and statements of various individuals were recorded and further investigation was carried out.On completion of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he main appellant and submit that the entire records of the private diary stands correlated to the duty paid clearances made by them. It is his submission that both the lower authorities have come to the conclusion that the said explanation given by the main appellant is incorrect as the documents which were produced were for the period prior to the period in question i.e. 1.9.2001 to 15.9.2001. It is the submission of the ld. Counsel for the Appellant-Assessee that diary as before the Tribunal on which reliance is placed does not indicate any receipt and clearances made by the main appellant during the period 2.9.2001 to 15.9.2001. He submits that all the documentary records connecting dispatches made as per private diary were produced bef....

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 demand based upon the clearances made in the private diary has been closed for clandestine. After reading page 112 in appeal memorandum he would submit that Shri Prem Kumar Ramesh Chandra Sharma has admitted on 16.9.2001 as also on 12.3.2003 and came up for a new ground which is incorrect. Subsequently, the ld. A.R. reads the findings of the first appellate authority to submit that the confirmation of demand is correct and the impugned order needs to be upheld. 5. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both the sides and on perusal of the record, I find that the issue is regarding the demand of central excise duty on the main appellant as being clandestine removal of the goods based upon entries made in the private b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ries made in the said private booklet and could be only explained by Shri Balkishan Ramniwas, cousin of Shri Vimal Kuma Vishwanath Agarwal, but unfortunately, he expired on 18.9.2001. He also recorded that on the entire statement dated 5.3.2003, the officers did not ask me any question regarding seized booklet, hence, he is not in the knowledge about this booklet on that dates i.e. 15/16.9.2001. 7. In the absence of any evidence to show or indicate that this booklet on which reliance has been placed by Revenue to hold that there was clandestine removal for the period 1.9.2001 to 15.9.2001, I find that the entire case of the Revenue falls down in the absence of any corroborative evidence in the form of purchaser or transporter s document ....