2018 (4) TMI 293

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mbatore, are the manufacturers of tools, dies, jigs and fixtures and sheet metal components. Officers of HPU visited another premises of Southern Press Tools and found that they were manufacturing branded radiators of M/s. Universal Radiators Ltd and T72 Cooling system and also found that no accounts were maintained and the goods were cleared without payment of duty to M/s.Universal Radiators Ltd., after manufacturing. Though the components and raw materials utilized for the above manufacturing activities were received by M/s. Southern Press Tools directly from the suppliers, an impression was created by means of fraudulent records that the same were supplied by M/s. Universal Radiators Ltd to M/s. Southern Press Tools. 3. After due proc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., confirmed the duty and penalty. 6. Aggrieved by the said order, Universal Radiators Ltd., and Southern Press Tools, have again approached the Tribunal, on the ground that the findings of the adjudicating authority were not sustainable. The Tribunal, vide Final Order Nos.1067 and 1068 of 2007, dated 29/8/2007, allowed the appeals. 7. During the review of the abovesaid order, the department felt that the same is not legal and proper, and liable to be quashed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, under the powers vested upon it, under Section 35 L of the Central Excise Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, vide order, dated 10/8/2011, in Civil Appeal Nos.2878-2879 of 2008, allowed the appeals filed by the department, ordered, to decide the i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Central Excise Rules, 1944 which clearly evidences the existence of the factory at the aforesaid premises. The said certificate has not been surrendered till date. (ii). It is a well settled position in law that admitted facts need not be proved which is laid down in the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Assistant Collector of Customs Vs. Govindasamy Raghupathy {1998 (98) ELT 50 (Mad.)}. Statements recorded under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is a valid piece of evidence under Section 25 of the Evidence Act as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court, in the case of Romesh Chandra Mehta Vs. State of West Bengal {1970 AIR 1940}. When such inculpatory statement is given by the authorised signatories of both the ....