2018 (7) TMI 521

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... specific information about M/s. Pankaj Ispat Ltd., Raipur ( in short "PIL") to have been involved in clandestine procurement of raw-material, production and clearance of MS Ingots and TMT bars etc., the Preventive Branch of Central Excise, Raipur conducted raid in PIL on 12th April, 2012 and noticed shortage of 1066.615 MT MS Ingots valued at Rs. 3,57,31,603/-, 9.695 MT TMT Bar (Atlas brand) valued at Rs. 3,64,290/- and 219.56 MT Sponge Iron valued at Rs. 52,07,963/-. 3. In addition, the statement of Director of M/s. PIL Shri Pankaj Agrawal was recorded, who agreed qua the noticed shortage of input and finished goods. From the document recovered from the premises of M/s. PIL, M/s. Ram Nivas Ispat Pvt. Ltd./ its Director Mr.Rakesh Jalan th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is prayed to be allowed. 6. While rebutting these arguments, it is submitted by ld. DR that M/s. PIL is not at all a third party. From the document recovered from their premises M/s. PIL is the regular buyer of the raw-material as well as the finished goods from the appellants, that too, without any element of the Excise duty. It is submitted that plea of no opportunity to cross-examine Mr. Pankaj Agrawal was never taken by the appellants before the Commissioner (Appeals). Department relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Customs vs. D Bhoormull - 1983 (13) ELT 1546 (SC) and that of this Tribunal in the case of CCE, Meerut vs. Gupta Synthetics - 2004 (169) ELT 248 (Tri.-Del.). Finally by justifying th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he appellant nor any documents got recovered from their premises. 9. It is also evident on record that appellants were not given any opportunity to cross-examine Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Director of M/s. PIL. These facts are sufficient for us to arrive at a firm opinion that the documents recovered from a third premises were never got corroborated, hence can not be lead into evidence at least for proving the alleged guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubts. Mere preponderance of evidence in case of the allegations of clandestine removal cannot be considered as the tangible evidence. There is nothing in the statements of Mr. Rakesh Jalan, which may corroborate the allegations/ admissions on the part of Mr.Pankaj Agrawal, the sole stateme....