TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 1311
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....03.10.2009 and found that it contained one consignment of copper tubes without any duty paying documents placed along with two consignments for which duty paid documents was available. The investigation was extended to the factory premises of the appellant and it was noticed that the consignment which was found without any documents were neither accounted in the Central Excise records and not properly explained. During the search of the factory incriminating documents were withdrawn the statements of the partner, four purchasers were recorded. Subsequently, show cause notice dated 28.02.2011 was issued demanding Central Excise duty by invoking the extended period, the demand of interest on the Central Excise duty demanded and proposed for i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed that they have not purchased the goods from the appellant without documents. It is his submission that the First Appellate Authority has not considered this categorical statements and the affidavit by stating that these affidavits were not produces before the lower authorities. It is his submission that the Adjudicating Authority as well as the First Appellate Authority has not considered the facts that there were no investigation carried out in respect of additional purchases of raw materials or unusual consumption of the utilities to come to a conclusion that there was clandestine manufacture and clearances of the goods to the tune of 70704 Kgs and Rs. 98,74,255/- of copper tubes. It is his further submission they have filed a Chartere....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t there is clandestine removal and the retraction of the statements by the purchasers will not carry the case any further as the recovery of this duplicate note books from the factory premises would indicates that there was systematic evasion of duty by the appellant. It is the submission that the statements of individual admitted that there were clandestine removals, she would submit the First Appellate Authority has addressed the submissions of the appellants has to the production capacity being not there for manufacturing of final goods. It is her submission that the appellant are not able to explain the entries made in the said duplicate books and also that why these books were lying in the factory. It is her further submission that in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....horities simply does not record any finding on the retraction of the statements by affidavits. As regards other two purchasers I notice that these two purchasers at the end of the statements itself have stated that they have not received any goods without duty paid documents from the appellant. It seems that the First Appellate Authority has not considered these important/vital evidence that the purchasers statements cannot be relied upon, on the face two purchasers retracted the statements while, two of them denying receipts of goods without documents. The Revenue s case that there were purchasers who received the goods clandestinely now stands demolished by these facts. 7.2 Secondly, I find that the appellant had produced a Chartered E....