2018 (5) TMI 668

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ts are manufacturers registered under Central Excise Act and engaged in the manufacture of H.B Wire and Welded/Hexagonal Wire Mesh, which attracts central excise duty. Shri Mahendra Shantilal Mukim is the sole Director, who is also one of the appellants in the present appeals. 3. A search was conducted at the business premises of the firm, M/s.Deepak Industries, Raipur on 20.05.2013, whose proprietor is Shri Ravinder Singh. At the relevant time, he was also looking the business affairs of M/s. Prakash Industries. During the course of search of M/s.Deepak Industries, incriminating documents including pencil written ledgers, diaries, note pads, order sheets, weighment slips, test certificates, dispatch registers, etc. were recovered. From ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... submits that the appellant is rightly entitled for enjoying SSI exemption as per notification no.08/2003-CE. To support the clandestine removal, Department has not brought out any corroborative evidence nor any materials on record. 6. On the strength of the written submission, he further submits that shortage of stock in the business premises, during the search, was purely on eye estimation and on assumptions and presumptions. He also contended that allegation of clandestine removal on the basis of search verification cannot be sustained. He also submits that only shortage of 50 MT of stock was noticed and for remaining quantity, the appellants were having valid vouchers. He also submits that no opportunity of cross examination was prov....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....09.2013, the word "WB" was shown against the consignment, which were without bills. He also submits that Shri Sanjay Dugar was performing his duty at the instructions of Shri Mahendra Shantilal Mukim. 10. Regarding the retraction of the statement, he submits that the retraction was too late, which has no relevance as per the ratio laid down in the following cases - (i) Continental Cement Company - 2014 (309) ELT 411 (All.); (ii) K.P. Abdul Majeed Vs. CC, Cochin-2014(309)ELT 671 (Ker); (iii) CC Vs.Shamshuddin M.A Kadar - 2010(259)ELT 44 (Bom.); (iv) CCE Vs. Praveen Kumar & Co. -2015 (328) ELT 220(T-Del.). 11. Finally, he justified the impugned order. 12. After hearing both the sides and on perusa....