TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (7) TMI 150
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... conclusion that the consumption of 852 units is sufficient for the production of 1 M.T. Steel ingots in the case of the petitioner when the Central Excise Deptt., has already fixed the norms of consumption of 1000 units of steel ingots in the case of induction furnance". 2.A few facts as relevant for the decision of these cases may be briefly noticed. 3.In pursuance to an information that the petitioners were indulging in suppression of production and clandestine removal of the steel ingots, a surveillance was kept on the activities of the company. On October 11, 1990, a truck bearing No. PUR 7537 was intercepted. The driver produced a Central Excise Gate Pass No. 515 showing the removal of 14.230 MTs of steel ingots. He and various ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... cause notice. The matter was disposed of by the Commissioner vide order dated December 16, 1992. A copy of the order passed in respect of the Company is at Annexure P-3. On appeal before the Tribunal, the matter was remanded to the Commissioner for the grant of further opportunity. The matter was decided by the Commissioner vide order dated August 17, 1995. A copy of the order has been produced as Annexure P-5 with the petition. In fact, separate appeals were filed by the company and its two Directors. The three appeals were consolidated and were dismissed by the Tribunal vide its order dated December 24, 1997. A copy of the order has been produced as Annexure P-7. Then, the petitioners filed applications for reference to this Court under ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er of the Tribunal was vitiated and that the substantial questions of law as mentioned above arises for the opinion of this Court. Is it so? 10.Admittedly, truck No. PUR 7537 was intercepted on October 11, 1990. On demand, the truck driver had produced the Central Excise Gate Pass No. 515. It indicated the removal of 14.230 MTs of steel ingots from the factory premises at 0850 hours. On being questioned, Wirsa Singh - the driver had admitted that a consignment of ingots on the Gate Pass had already been transported. The said gate pass was being used for transporting the second consignment of ingots. Shri Jeet Singh - the Security Supervisor of the petitioner - company had admitted that "on the directions of the owners of the factory, he ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....It is true that some of the employees had resiled from their original statements at the subsequent stage. However, it is on consideration of the entire evidence that the Tribunal has decided the matter. It has recorded a firm finding in paragraph 36 of its order that "the goods were being clandestinely removed....". Nothing was pointed out by the Counsel to show that this finding is incorrect. However, the main emphasis of the Counsel was based on the appreciation of evidence relating to the consumption of electricity. In fact, this is the central issue in this case and the question raised by the petitioners is directed towards this dispute only. 13.The issue relating to the consumption of electricity has also been considered by the Tri....