2009 (1) TMI 230

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i Manoj Sood and Surjit Bhadu, Advocates, for the Respondent. [Order per : M.M. Kumar, J.].- This order shall dispose of CEA Nos.101 and 122 of 2006 as both the appeals raise common question of law. The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal New Delhi (for brevity, 'the Tribunal') has also disposed of the appeals by one common order. The revenue has preferred the aforementioned appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ther the Tribunal was correct in ignoring such preponderance of evidences and probabilities in passing their order against the Appellants." 2. The Tribunal in its order dated 24-8-2004 [2005 (182) E.L.T. 106 (Tribunal)] has recorded the finding that the revenue has failed to establish the allegation that the assessee-respondent did not receive the raw material and that the transactions were bog....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ondent that the statement was very vague because it nowhere specifically admitted that the invoices issued in the name of the assessee were bogus. The revenue did not rebut the stand of the assessee-respondent that they had received any invoice of more than 6 tonnes and as such the supply made to the assessee-respondent could not be regarded as bogus. The revenue further failed to controvert the s....