TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (3) TMI 252
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....any (hereinafter referred to as Company), while the other two appellants are its Directors. The duty has been confirmed against the company for having indulged in clandestine manufacture and removal of goods such as Juicer Mixer Grinder, Hand Blenders, Food Processors and mixer Grinders, etc. under the brand name of 'Greenline' during the period in dispute (21-7-2001 to 7-1-2002 and October, 2002 to March, 2003). Penalties have been imposed on the other appellants as they abetted the company in the evasion of the duty. 3.The learned Counsel for the appellants has contended that the charge of clandestine manufacture and removal of goods had been based only on assumptions and presumptions and not on the strength of any tangible, cogent evi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he motors. On the first floor of that premises, the assembly work was carried out by them. The finished goods, after testing were transferred to premises No. C/47 for storage. The factory premises was visited by the Central Excise offices on 8-1-2002 and certain finished goods and raw material lying therein, were seized. The officers also visited the premises of M/s. Greenline Appliances, M/s. Honey Industries, M/s. Kamal Industries who had been supplying the raw material to the appellant company. The statements of Shri Santokh Singh Lahori Lal, employees and Sunil Khullar, Director of the company were recorded. 7.After going through the statements of the witnesses and the documents brought on record, in our view, the contention raised b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... back. Therefore, in these circumstances, no reliance could be placed on his statement, for saddling the appellants with duty and penalty. 8.Another employee whose statement whose statement recorded during the investigation, was Lahori lal. But he in his statement, had not conceded or admitted the clandestine manufacture of the motors or removal of the finished goods by the company without payment of duty during the period in dispute. He has denied any knowledge about the maintenance of the two note books by Shri Santokh Singh. Therefore, his testimony did not advance the case of the Revenue. The testimony of Shri Sunil Khullar recorded on 11-1-2002 of having supplied 4000 motors of JMG to Shri Parveen Kumar, Proprietor of M/s. Praveen E....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Switches Pvt. Ltd. The plea of the Revenue that 7,000 pieces of switches of mixies were received by the appellant company under the cover of invoices and other 7000 pieces without invoices from this company, does not stand substantiated as the appellant company had produced the invoices showing the purchase of 14,450 pieces of switches from this company under proper invoices. 10.The evidence of Shri Mohan Bhatti of M/s. D.R. International Pvt. Ltd., that on the strength of three bills, goods (Plastic raw material) were supplied to the appellant company during disputed period, could not be accepted as none of those bills carried his signatures even. The name of the consignee in those bills shown is not the appellant company. Rather, it i....