TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1016
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cation No. 22/2003-CE and 53/2003-Cus (NT) dated 22.07.2003, by the Commissioner of Central Tax, Raigarh (Appeals) vide his above referred order is assailed in this appeal in this second round of litigation. 2. I have heard submission from both sides and perused the order passed by this Tribunal on dated 13.03.2019 in respect of the Appellant on this very issue, in the first round of litigation. It would be worthwhile to reproduce para 4.1 and para 4.2 of the said order: "4.1. We find that both the notifications in question and the board circulars issued in this regard cast an obligation on the Appellants as well as the department at the end of supplier as well as receiver. The goods in question are removed and received under bo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the superintendent in charge of the consignor of Excisable goods is required to send weekly reminders to the superintendent in charge of the consignee. It is also seen that the Deputy/ Assistant Commissioner shall secure a satisfactory proof of the goods having been received by the consignee / ensure that the duty of excise on the goods not received at the destination is recovered from the consigner. Ongoing through the records of the case, we find that no such efforts have been made by the department. In the entire chain of events officers' at the consignees end would certainly be in a position to confirm the receipt of the goods or otherwise from their own records as well as the records of the consignees. Therefore it is in the interest o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lows: "12. After the personal hearing, letter was issued to the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner of the noticee to carry necessary verifications at the consignee end. The outcome of the verification was communicated by the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner under letter 09.02.2020 wherein it was informed that they had entered into correspondence with the Superintendent, Customs Division, Bengaluru, Superintendent of Customs, Chennai, Superintendent of Customs, Chandigarh, Superintendent of Customs, Kochi, Superintendent of Customs, Gurugram, Superintendent of Customs, Hyderabad, Superintendent of Customs, New Customs House, Ballard Estate, Mumbai, Superintendent of Customs, Sasoon Road, Pune, Superintendent of Customs, Thiruvanan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....end could not be obtained. As another resort, the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner of the noticee even requested the noticee to submit documents they have in possession in support of the claim that the goods were received by the buyers. However, the noticee through their advocate's letter dated 08.12.2020 contested, "In view of the aforesaid, the requirement of our clients submitting proofs of the receipt of the goods does not arise and it is for you, as the Adjudicating Authority to call upon the Division Office of the Consignees to ascertain the same. Needless to mention, that the proofs of export/delivery of goods to the customers of our clients were submitted during the course of earlier proceedings and are a part of the record be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he jurisdiction of the Commissioner had travelled into the hands of multiple Commissioners in the meantime for which no document was traceable from the department side and surprisingly Appellant who is contesting to get necessary relief had refused to produce documents concerning proof of receipt of goods by the consignee, as reveal from para 17. Therefore, neither the department has any right to raise a demand in the absence of any documentary proof to substantiate such demand nor the Appellant could be absolved of its liability since it refused to cooperate in the adjudication process, in furnishing proof of delivery of goods to the customers. However, having regard to the fact that there was specific direction given by this Tribunal in i....