2019 (8) TMI 871

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ised Representative for the respondent ORDER ASHOK JINDAL: The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order wherein demand of duty has been confirmed against M/s Capital Ispat Limited alleging that they have received the inputs which has been used in manufacture of excisable goods and cleared without payment of duty. Further, the penalty on the appellants has been imposed. 2. The facts of the case are that the main appellant is engaged in the manufacture of mild steel angles and channels. The main input is M.S. Ingots and billets. On the basis of intelligence, on 08.02.2005 the premises of the appellant were searched on the basis of investigation conducted at the end of M/s Shree Ganesh Roadways, the transporter. During t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng that they have received inputs manufactured by M/s Lauls Limited without payment of duty through M/s Shree Ganesh Roadways clandestinely which has been used in manufacture of final product which has been cleared without payment of duty and this Tribunal in those cases has set aside the demands raised against those assessees. Therefore, the same treatment be given to the appellants. He further submitted that no cross-examination of Shri Ram Bilas Bansal, Shri Rakesh Bansal and Shri Gaurav Soni was granted to the appellant and the same is in gross violation of principles of natural justice. Moreover, the demand has been raised against M/s Capital Ispat Limited on the basis of third party evidence without any corroborative evidence, therefo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oadways and the same was used in manufacture of final product which has been cleared without payment of duty. In this case, Revenue has failed to bring any corroborative evidence on record except the statement recorded during the course of investigation. Merely admission by way of statement without corroborative evidence cannot result to prove the allegation of clandestine removal of goods. Therefore, on the said basis demand cannot be confirmed. 7. Moreover, as held by this Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-I vs. Kuber Tobacco India Limited-2016  (338) ELT 113 (Tri.) wherein it has been held that the statement recorded during the course of investigation is to be testified by the adjudicating authority in....