2019 (2) TMI 567

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dhwa: After hearing both the sides, duly represented by Ms. Rinki Arora, ld. Advocate for the appellant and Shri P. Juneja, ld. DR for Revenue, I find that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of MS bars. Their factory was visited by the Central Excise officers on 3.8.2010, who conducted various checks and verifications. Nothing incriminating was found. 2. However, the residential premis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in clandestine activities and has evaded duty to the tune of Rs. 25,43,832/- 4. Based upon the same proceedings were initiated against them for confirmation of the said demand along with confirmation of interest and imposition of penalty. On adjudication, the proposals in the show cause notice were upheld and duties were confirmed along with imposition of penalty of identical amount. The order of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the residential premises were of M/s Sanjog Steels. It was further contended that in the appellant's premises, no stock taking of the final product or the raw materials was conducted so as to corroborate the charge of clandestine removal. Further, they submitted that the Revenue has not produced any evidence to show that the appellant had manufactured excess final product and has cleared the same....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by them and non-conduct of stock taking does not make any direct sustainable impact on the facts of the case and accordingly he rejected the same. 7. I note that the entire case of the Revenue is based upon recovery of the so called incriminating evidence from the residential premises of one of the Directors. They have not adduced any evidence to connect these documents with the activities of the....