TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (2) TMI 225
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Prabhat Sanitryware and M/s. Supreme Plast India exceeded Rs. 1 crore i.e. the limit indicated by an exemption notification issued by the Department in that regard. The crux of the charge was that the clearances had to be taken together, and so valued, the petitioners were liable to pay excise duty. 3.The adjudication order, upon issuance of the show cause notice resulted in findings delivered against the petitioners by the Commissioner of Central Excise. Aggrieved, they preferred appeals to the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. By its order dated 1-2-2005 [2005 (186) E.L.T. 587 (Tri.-Del.)], the Tribunal allowed the appeal and held inter alia that no materials were produced nor was there anything brought on record to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....proceed independently, irrespective of adjudication orders. 7.The finding of the Tribunal to the extent it is relevant is extracted below : As Revenue has not succeeded in proving that the fully9. manufactured goods were removed from the premises of M/s. Hindustan Silicate and M/s. Bihariji, no question of demanding central excise duty from these two Appellants arise and more so on the basis of documents seized from the premises of Cosmos Industries. The learned Advocate has also referred to the statement dated 29-5-2003 of Sh. Vinod Kumar Jain who has deposed that the details were prepared simply to impress L.N. Agarwal and that some of the sale figures pertained to the goods purchased from open market. Further, there is no material ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r premises are also not liable to confiscation nor penalty is imposable on any of the Appellants. Accordingly, all the' appeals are allowed with consequential relief, if any' 8.This Court in the judgment reported as Sunil Gulati v. R.K. Vohra, 2007 (1) JCC 220 which was relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner during the hearing elaborately considered the various nuances of identical problems where adjudication proceedings culminated in orders favouring the accused/assessee and where in exercise of independent powers prosecution or complaints were lodged. The Court after noticing various judgments including Supreme Court rulings and the judgment in Standard Chartered Bank's case (supra) was of the opinion that there seemed t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rosecution'. In case adjudication proceedings are decided against a person3. who is facing prosecution as well and the Tribunal has also upheld the findings of the adjudicators/assessing authority, that would have no bearing on the criminal proceedings and the criminal proceedings are to be determined on its own merits in accordance with law, uninhibited by the findings of the Tribunal. It is because of the reason that in so far as criminal action is concerned, it has to be proved as per the strict standards fixed for criminal cases before the criminal court by producing necessary evidence. In case of converse situation namely where the accused4. persons are exonerated by the competent authorities/Tribunal in adjudication proceedings,....