Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Swastik Panch Biri Works vs Cce & St, Bhopal on 21 January, 2013
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, WEST BLOCK NO.II, R.K. PURAM, NEW DELHI-110066 COURT NO. II Central Excise appeal No. 2556/2010-SM [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 87/BPL/2010 dated 14.06.2010 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise & Service Tax, Bhopal] Date of Hearing: 21st January, 2013 M/s. Swastik Panch Biri Works Appellants Vs. CCE & ST, Bhopal Respondent
Present for the Appellant : None
Present for the Respondent : Shri S.K. Panda, Jt. CDR
Coram: Honble Shri D.N. Panda, Judicial Member
FINAL ORDER NO. 55357 DATED 21/01/2013
Per D.N. Panda
None present for the appellant. When the matter came on 10.9.2012, for non appearance, adjournment was granted. On similar ground adjournments were granted from time to time. On 30.10.2012 also appellant was not present. The appellant is enjoying waiver of pre-deposit of 50% of duty element in terms of stay order passed on 11.10.2010. Therefore, appeal is taken up for disposal.
2. Learned Jt. CDR relying on para 5 of first appellate order submits that there is no material on record nor any ground of appeal to discard the finding of first appellate order. Therefore, appeal should be dismissed.
3. When the investigation was made on 2.11.2006, unaccounted stock of biris was found lying in the adjoining premises of the appellant. So also incriminating material in the shape of loose papers and note books was recovered which disclosed unaccounted purchase and clearance of biris of Rs. 2,05,361/-. Having no other defence the proprietor appellant Shri Mohd. Sher Ali admitted recovery of incriminating documents and contents therein, and also physical inventories of loos biris purchased from thekedar Shri Abdul Salam who admitted supply of the same by his statement dated 21.11.2006. Learned appellate authority considered these evidences and finding no other evidence in favour of the appellant confirmed adjudication. Grounds of appeal of the appellant do not disclose any cogent evidence for interference to the appellate finding. In para 21 of appeal memo the appellant simply says that panchnama was faulty. Such a ground is not permissible when the manner how that is faulty is not evidenced.
4. The appellants silence proves that there is no merit in its appeal. Finding of the first appellate authority is based on evidences and is reasoned. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.
(Dictated & pronounced in the Open Court) (D.N. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ??
??
??
??
3E/2556/2010-SM