TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (2) TMI 432
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....AL) Shri N.K. Chowdhury, Advocate for the Appellant (s) Shri P.K.Ghosh, Authorized Representative for the Revenue ORDER The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order demanding duty alleging clandestine clearance of goods and imposing penalty on both the appellants. 2. The facts of the case are that the departmental officers searched the factory premises of the appellant on 02.06.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nts recovered during the course of investigation. The matter was contested by the appellant, but adjudication order was passed confirming the demand proposed in the show cause notice along with interest and penalties on both the appellants were imposed. Against the said order, the appellants are before me. 3. The Ld.Counsel for the appellants submits that demand has been raised against the appell....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s recovered during the course of investigation, in that circumstances, the demands against the appellants are not sustainable. Consequently, no penalty is imposable on the appellant. 4. On the other hand, the Ld.Authorized Representative for the department supported the impugned order and submitted that it is the case where the parallel invoices were recovered during the course of investigation w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... invoices nor any investigation was made with the transporters. No effort was made to find out, who is the author of those invoices. In the absence of any corroboration to that effect, the demand is not sustainable. Moreover, the cross-examination of the employees were not granted to the appellants which is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice in terms of Section 9D of the Centr....