TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 64
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... These miscellaneous applications have been filed by the Revenue against Final Order No.50006-50007/2020 dated 08.01.2020 passed in Appeal Nos.E/50169 and 50170 of 2019. By the said final order, this Tribunal allowed the appeals of the appellant company in part by setting aside the impugned order-in-original except for the amount of Rs.2,81,953/-, which was confirmed by the Tribunal. The appeal of the Director, Shri Vishal Singh was also allowed. 2. In these applications, the grievance of the Revenue is that the Final Order of this Tribunal is based on some incorrect facts with reference to paras-5 and 6 of the Final Order of this Tribunal. 3. It is urged that this Tribunal have found that the demand of duty of Rs.3,03,41,494/- is ba....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Authorised Representative for Revenue to produce the documents/printouts, which were recovered from the computer of the appellant assessee, which had been entered in Annexure C to the panchnama dated 6th May, 2014, drawn at the factory, wherein in Annexure-C at serial no. 112, it is mentioned - production report, comprising of 531 pages. Ld. Authorised Representative was also directed to share the copies of such documents with the counsel for the assessee, before the next date of hearing, which was fixed on 8th July, 2022. 7. On the next date of hearing, ld. Departmental Representative placed before the Tribunal a copy of panchnama dated 6th May, 2014, drawn at the factory premises (RUD-3, 7 pages), printouts (RUD-8, 6 pages), statement....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roduce the documents, which have been entered in Annexure-C to the panchnama dated 6th May, 2014, stated to be drawn at the factory, wherein in Annexure-C at serial no. 112, it is mentioned that - production report (s) comprising of 531 pages. This document was alleged to be retrieved from the computer of the appellant assessee at the factory on the date of search - 6th May, 2014. However, ld. Authorised Representative has produced only a document running into 6 pages. He further submits that on a bare perusal of the said document, makes it clear that it is nothing but a calculation chart prepared by the Department. He further points out that from para-4.5 of the show cause notice, wherein it is stated - "the calculation chart showing the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dmissible evidence. Further, statements recorded during investigation have been rightly found to be inadmissible for want of cross-examination. Further, no clinching evidence was found by the Tribunal in support of the allegation of clandestine removal of goods. It is further urged that the present Rectification Application is misconceived and is fit to be dismissed. 12. He further urges that the scope of interference in Rectification Application is limited to the mistakes apparent on the face of the record either on fact or in law. Where there is attempt made to review the order by way of long drawn reasoning and/or re-visiting the whole evidence, the same is beyond the scope of rectification. 13. Having considered the rival argument....