Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Gujarat High Court

C.C.E And S.T. - Ahmedabad vs Snehal Rajnikant Shah, Director Of M/S ... on 19 January, 2021

Author: J. B. Pardiwala

Bench: J.B.Pardiwala, Ilesh J. Vora

        C/TAXAP/266/2020                                        ORDER




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                      R/TAX APPEAL NO. 266 of 2020
                                 With
                      R/TAX APPEAL NO. 328 of 2020
==========================================================
                     C.C.E. AND S.T. - AHMEDABAD-III
                                  Versus
                      SUNRISE TRADEWINGS P LTD.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ANKIT SHAH(6371) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
for the Opponent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
        and
        HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA

                                Date : 19/01/2021

                     COMMON ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA)

1. These tax appeals at the instance of the revenue, are ordered to be admitted on the following substantial questions of law:-

(i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal has committed a gross legal error by giving perverse findings without appreciating the evidences on record and the degree of proof required to establish a case of clandestine removal against the assessee?

(ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the Hon'ble CESTAT is erred in allowing the party Appeal merely on the basis of submissions made by the assessee that too with no Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 21 21:02:45 IST 2021 C/TAXAP/266/2020 ORDER contrary evidence and without examining the material evidences on record mentioned and discussed in the adjudication order?

(iii)Whether the evidences in the form of documents and electronic devices like pen drive and the circumstantial evidences gathered and discussed in the adjudication order, which are corroborative to each other, cannot be relied to establish the case of revenue, despite the observation of the Apex Court in various alike cases as discussed and relied upon under the grounds of appeal?

(iv) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the Hon'ble CESTAT was right in rejecting and not taking into consideration the printouts derived from pen drive and holding them as inadmissible for failure to meet the conditions specified in Section 36B of the Central Excise Act, despite of the material facts on record that the print out of pen drive data are not alone relied upon but, they are corroborative with other physical evidences gathered in this case and also duly explained and confessed by different entities?

(v) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, Tribunal is justified in holding that no case for penalty is made out?

(vi) Other questions of law may be framed by the Hon'ble Court looking to the pleadings raised by the Revenue and facts and evidence on record and pass such order as the Hon'ble Court may deem proper in the matter."

              C/TAXAP/266/2020                           ORDER




    2. Issue notice to respondent.

                                              (J. B. PARDIWALA, J)


                                                 (ILESH J. VORA,J)
P.S. JOSHI




                                Page 3 of 3

                                                Downloaded on : Sat Aug 21 21:02:45 IST 2021