COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. MADRAS SUSPENSIONS LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revenue is aggrieved with the Orders -in -Appeal Nos. 89 and 90/2002 (MDU) (GVN), dated 17 -5 -2002 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) by which he has held that there has been no clandestine re moval and demands cannot be sustained on the basis of chits/notes and has also found that there is no corroborative evidence on record. The findings recorded in Paras 3 and 4 are extracted herein below :

(2.) The Revenue contend in this appeal that the statement itself indicate the purchase of inputs illicitly and its clandestine removal of goods. Further reliance is made on the Tribunal's judgment rendered in the case of Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE as reported in 2001 (130) E.L.T. 562 wherein demands have been confirmed on the basis of statement and the entries made by the watchman in the registers which showed the removal of goods in the gate. It is stated that in a similar circumstance demands have been confirmed on the basis of shortage. Therefore, in the present case the demands are required to be confirmed. It is stated that the Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in not confirming the demands and hence this appeal.

(3.) Heard ld. DR, Shri P. Devaladu who took me through the entire record and both the impugned orders and submitted that there are clear admissions made by the assessee and the staff and based on the private chits and therefore the demands are required to be confirmed.