TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (7) TMI 89
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act is admissible in evidence, especially when the same was not retracted at any stage keeping in view the fact that proceedings under Section 14 are the Judicial proceedings? (b) Whether the Department is required to probe and prove its case of mathematics precision or is required to establish such a degree of probabilities that a prudent man on its basis believe the existence of the facts in issue. As held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Customs and others v. D. Bhoor Mall reported as 1983 (13) E.L.T. page 1546. (c) Whether the Tribunal is right in accepting the plea of the assessee which is not even raised in the ground of appeal or before the Commissioner that statement of the truck driver cannot be taken into considerat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of evasion of the payment of the Central Excise? (h) Whether ratio of the law laid down by the Tribunal in the case of Bhillai Conductor is applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case?" 2. For deciding whether or not the questions framed by the petitioner are the questions of law requiring determination by this Court, we may briefly notice the facts. 3. Respondent No. 1 is engaged in the manufacture of acrylic sheet falling under Chapter heading 39.20 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. On 23-12-1999, the preventive staff of the Central Excise visited the factory premises of respondent no. 1 and carried out stock taking of raw material and finished excisable goods. S/Shri Braham Deo Jha and Kapil Dev Aggarwal, rep....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... goods may not be confiscated and penalty may not be imposed. The case was finally adjudicated by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Delhi-III and order dated 19-12-2001 was passed in the following terms : "(i) MODVAT credit of Rs. 11,56,607/- on inputs disallowed under Rule 57-I of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 and interest demanded. (ii) Demand of Central Excise duty of Rs. 3,920/-confirmed on Plasticizer found short and interest demanded under Rule 57-I of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. (iii) Seized goods i.e. 1,329 kgs. of Acrylic sheets valued at Rs. 79,740/- confiscated under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. (iv) Penalty of Rs. 12,00,000/- imposed on respondent no. 1 under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rul....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted at any stage keeping in view the facts that proceedings under Section 14 are the judicial proceedings? (b) Whether the Tribunal is right in accepting the plea of the assessee which is not even raised in the ground of appeal or before the Commissioner that statement of the truck driver cannot be taken into consideration. Since they have not been given the opportunity for cross-examination. Whereas 12 notices were issued to the assessee or its authorised signatories, but they have not chosen to appear before the revenue? (c) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that it is not a case of the Revenue that there was no misdeclaration regarding description of the goods in....