2019 (11) TMI 432

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r of M/s Pragati Ingots and Power Pvt. Ltd. 2. Another company namely, M/s Pankaj Ispat Limited, (PIL for short) also located at Raipur is engaged in the manufacture of MS Ingots and structural steels. There was a search by the officers of preventive branch on 12th April 2012 at the factory and other premises of M/s Pankaj Ispat Limited (PIL) and certain documents were recovered and seized. It appeared to revenue that PIL is engaged in suppression of production and clandestine removal of MS Ingots and structural steel. During investigation, statement of Sh. Pankaj Agrawal, Director of M/s Pankaj Ispat Limited (PIL) was recorded on 19.09.2012 and 02.10.2012, wherein, he inter alia, admitted the receipt of MS Igots without invoices from th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in appeal, passed by the Commissioner (Appeal), who was pleased to allow the appeal of revenue, recording the finding that as the buyer-M/s Pankaj Ispat Limited have confirmed the quantum as per their records, no further evidence is required. Further business relationship is admitted by the appellant with Pankaj Ispat Limited. Accordingly, the Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the imposition of duty with equal amount of penalty on both the appellants. 6. Being aggrieved, the appellants are before this Tribunal. 7. Heard the parties. 8. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that the Department has raised a wrong recovery relying upon a third party evidence i.e. documents recovered from M/s. PIL. No investigations in the form of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... be set aside. 10. After hearing both the sides, since the sole challenge to the order is its reliance upon third party evidence, it is necessary to check the evidentiary value of the third party evidence. The relevant case law in the case of Bajrangbali Ingots & Steel Pvt. Ltd. & Suresh Agarwal vs. CCE, Raipur in Appeal No. E/52062 & 52066/2018 heard on 16.11.2018, which is held as follows:- 9. The law i.e. as to whether the third party records can be adopted as an evidence for arriving at the findings of clandestine removal, in the absence of any corroborative evidence, is well established. Reference can be made to Hon'ble Allahabad High Court decision in the case of Continental Cement Company Vs. Union of India - 2014 (309) E....