TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (3) TMI 555
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a and Shri Pawankumar F Gupta, are before us challenging order [order-in-original no. 43/CEX/Comm/2014 dated 15th July 2014] of Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Aurangabad which, with the finding of clandestine removal of 'mild steel (MS) bars' between 1st April 2008 and 23rd March 2011, had charged the assessee with duty of Rs. 3,35,86,883 under section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944, besides interest as applicable under section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944, and imposed penalty of like amount under section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 as well as penalty of Rs. 10,00,000 each imposed on the two individuals. 2. From the contentions made on behalf of the appellants, it would appear that the findings are in dispute sol....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... impugned order. 5. We find from the records that the confirmation of demand on goods allegedly cleared clandestinely has been based on certain records recovered from other parties and sought to be backed by statements of customers and transporters. No evidence as forthcoming of any other material records of physical clearance or of any recovery of sale proceeds. It is clear from '17.2 The assessee in their submission has stated that this case is based on statements, drafted by the officers of DGCEI and recorded under pressure /threat, and hence not valid evidences. However, I find that no evidences brought out by the assessee that the aforesaid statements were recorded under pressure or threat On the other hand , the fact of recovery of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....atements recorded in this case, based on hard documentary evidences, are valid evidences and can't be invalidated by legal arguments. xxxxx 17.4 ................ I also find that the customers in their statements had clearly admitted to have received both types of finished goods from the assessee, i.e. with payment of duty as also without payment of duty and that the payments in respect of goods received without payment of duty had been made in cash. The transporters in their statements had admitted to have transported both types of goods from the factory of the assessee to various customers. xxxxxx 17.6 ...................... These evidences/ facts clearly establish clandestine clearances by the assessee. I find that the Hon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessee disputed the correctness of the statements and wanted to cross-examine, the Adjudicating Authority did not grant this opportunity to the assessee. It would be pertinent to note that in the impugned order passed by the Adjudicating Authority he has specifically mentioned that such an opportunity was sought by the assessee. However, no such opportunity was granted and the aforesaid plea is not even dealt with by the Adjudicating Authority. As far as the Tribunal is concerned, we find that rejection of this plea is totally untenable. The Tribunal has simply stated that cross-examination of the said dealers could not have brought out any material which would not be in possession of the appellant themselves to explain as to why their ....