2018 (5) TMI 549

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llant M/s. Sindh Ispat is engaged in manufacturing of M.S. angle, M.S. round, T.M.T. Bars, M.S. Square, M.S. Flats, falling under Chapter 72 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. On the basis of information that the said appellant is engaged in the manufacture of finished goods i.e. roll products on behalf of M/s. Amit Steels and removed the same clandestinely, without cover of Central Excise invoice and without payment of duty, the Preventive Officers visited the factory of the said appellant as well as the premises of Shri Narendra Agarwal, Proprietor of M/s. Amit Steels, Raipur. The search resulted in recovery of records and documents. The Central Excise Officers also verified the stock lying in the factory premises of the said appella....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d orders. Hence, these appeals were filed before the Tribunal. 3. The ld. Advocates appearing for the appellants submitted that based on the documents recovered from the premises of third party, M/s. Amit Steels, the Department has proceeded for confirming the adjudged demand. They further submitted that no other corroborative evidences were adduced in support of confirmation of the adjudged demand. They also contended that the Department has not investigated the matter at the supplier's end to ascertain about the procurement of the raw material for manufacture of the alleged clandestine removal of goods. Further, they also submitted that the transporters had not specifically stated that the goods were transported by them, without paymen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and without payment of Central Excise Duty. It is also an admitted fact on record that the Department has not investigated the matter at the customer's end to ascertain the fact regarding procurement of alleged clandestine removal of goods by the appellant. Further, no evidences were produced, showing receipt of payment for such clearances. Thus, in absence of any corroborative evidence produced by the Department, substantiating clandestine removal of goods, the charges cannot be levelled against the appellants for confirmation of the duty demand and for imposition of penalties. Shri Jatin Singhal, ld. Advocate for the appellant, under the cover of his letter dated 04.04.2018 (acknowledged by the Registry on 10.04.2018) has enclosed the Fin....