2021 (8) TMI 702
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the clandestine procurement of raw materials, production and clearance of M.S. Ingots and TMT Bars etc., the Central Excise Officers of Headquarters Preventive Branch, Raipur, visited the premises of one M/s. Pankaj Ispat Ltd. (in short "PIL") and verified the documents and also verified the stock of raw materials as well as the finished goods on 12.04.2012. In the search of the factory premises of M/s. PIL, revealed shortage of 1066.615 MT of MS Ingots valued at Rs. 3,57,31,603/-, 9.695 MT TMT Bars (Atlas Brand) valued at Rs. 3,64,290/- and 219.56 MT Sponge Iron valued at Rs. 52,07,963/-. The incriminating documents were recovered vide Panchnama dated 12.04.2012. Statement of Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Director of M/s. PIL was recorded on 19.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in-appeal dated 11.07.2018, allowed the appeal filed by the Department. Being aggrieved, this appeal is preferred by the assessee before this Tribunal. 3.1 I have heard Ms. Parul Sachdeva, ld. Counsel for the appellant and Shri P. Juneja, Authorised Representative for the respondent/Department. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that the Department has raised a wrong demand/recovery upon the third party documents, recovered from M/s.PIL. No investigations in the form of search or recoveries from the appellants' premises were made. There is also no other corroborative evidence on record, to corroborate the allegations, as have been confirmed by the lower appellate authority. Ld. Counsel further submitted that the or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Allahabad High Court's decision in the case of Continental Cement Company Vs. Union of India - 2014 (309) ELT 411 (All.) as also Tribunal's decision in the case of Raipur Forging Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Raipur -I - 2016 (335) ELT 297 (Tribunal-Delhi), CCE & ST, Raipur Vs. P.D. Industries Pvt. Ltd. -2016 (340) ELT 249 (Tribunal-Delhi) and CCE & ST, Ludhiana Vs. Anand Founders & Engineers - 2016 (331) ELT 340 (P&H). It stands held in all these judgements that the findings of clandestine removal cannot be upheld based upon the third party documents, unless there is clinching evidence or clandestine manufacture and removal of the goods." 7. There is no other evidence or documents in the form of stock verification of the raw-materials of the appe....




TaxTMI
TaxTMI