Order date – 18 October 2022

 Facts –

• The Appellant, Patidar products, intelligence was conducted by the DGCEI Ahmedabad on the premises of the appellant and found that they were engaged in evasion of Central Excise Duty by way of clandestine manufacture and removal of their finished products particularly “Flavoured Tobacco” and Gutkha under brand name Patidar. They also floated fictitious firm to do illegal business. It was further gathered that his employees were helping in clandestine removal of finished goods through Transport Company.
• The officers of DGCEI, recovered & seized various documents/ records like bill books etc. It was observed that one Mini Truck was lying loaded with finished goods at the factory. No documents/ records of the above said finished goods were found in the said factory premises or were produced and the same was also seized. Also cash amounting to RS.17, 50,000 was seized from the residence of the appellant as they fail to provide satisfactory reply on the matter.
• The officers recorded the statements of various persons in this matter. From the circumstantial/corroborative evidences in the form of documents/ records/ books seized and confessional statements it appeared that the appellant had been indulging in large scale evasion of Central Excise Duty for last five years and a show cause notice had issued on 11.01,2012 and 21.03,2013.
• Aggrieve appellant had filed an appeal.

Issue – 

• Whether the seizure of documents, cash and the truck are in order?

Order –

• The Tribunal observed that the appellant raised the issue of infraction of principles of natural justice on the part of the adjudicating authority by not permitting cross-examination of the witnesses sought by the appellant. It has been contended by the Appellants that this amounts to non-observance of the provisions of Section 9D of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
• It also find that the instant demand has been confirmed by the Ld. Commissioner on the basis of the statements of the persons whose cross-examination have not been allowed to test the correctness and authenticity of the allegations and hence the same will prejudice the interest of the appellants. Hence denial of cross-examination is unjustified.
• It is also observed that he entries made in the Kaccha Chits may create doubt but it cannot take place of evidence. It is observed that the allegation of suppression of production and clandestine removal is a serious allegation and it has to be established by the investigation by affirmative and cogent evidence.
• Without prejudice, as regard the duty confirmed on Pan Masala Containing Tobacco, commonly known as Gutkha , the tribunal find that during the search and panchnama proceeding there is no working machine was found by the department from the factory premises of Appellant. 
• Regarding the cash seized, it is admitted that the said amount of cash pertains to sale proceeds of clandestine removed goods. Further officer conducted the panchanama proceeding in factory under the presence of watchmen of Appellant, no responsible person of Appellant was  present during the panchanama proceeding.
• Hence the appeal is allowed.