Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8.14. It is noted that the Central Excise Officers while demanding duty on the basis of Carbon copies of the VAT challans of 258.481 M.T. had made an enquiry by recording the statement of the parties as well as the vehicle owners regarding the clearance of the goods as stated above and the Appeal No.: E/75921/2014-DB demand of duty on 258.481 M.T. is not sustainable. But after receipt of the Statement of procurement of the trading materials by letter dated 17.05.2017 where the name of the parties, vehicle nos, challan nos had been clearly mentioned, even then the Central Excise Officers had not made any enquiry thereon. It is not clear that when the Central Excise Officers shad made enquiry in respect of 258.481 M.T. of materials on the basis of carbon copy of the VAT Challan why the said Officers had not made any enquiry in respect of procurement of the trading materials on the basis of the "Statement" annexed with the letter dated 17.05.2017. It is merely mentioned in the SCN-2 as 'afterthought' without any verification. It is not the case that the appellant had not given any evidence regarding the procurement of trading materials prior to letter dated 17.05.2017. Therefore, the letter dated 17.05.2017 of the Statement of procurement of trading goods cannot be brushed aside as afterthought.

8.16. I find that the Adjudicating authority accepted the clearance of the Lead Ingot on the basis of VAT challan containing the description of the goods, quantity of the goods which was produced by the appellarit. On the other hand while the appellant produced the Statement of procurement of the trading materials on the basis Appeal No.: E/75921/2014-DB of challan containing description of the goods, quantity of the goods, parties name and the vehicle number, the Inquiry officers as well as the Adjudicating authority declared them as afterthought. The evidence of the statement of procurement of the trading goods on the basis of challans containing the description of the goods, quantity of the goods and the vehicles numbers cannot be brushed aside without any enquiry.

8.17. It may be noted that the SCN is a knowledge of fact, which is the outcome of the enquiry. By issuance of the Show Cause Notice, it is communicated based on the evidences and materials to the assessee to enable him to reply thereon. It is a duty to place all the materials of enquiry in the notice for the purpose of adjudication by the adjudicating authority. I find that in the present case, the enquiry officer without undertaking any enquiry in respect of procurement of the trading goods had contended the same documents as afterthought and stepped into the shoes of the adjudicating authority. The Enquiry Officer should have conducted proper enquiry before coming to the conclusion.

8.18. The appellant submitted a Certificate of a Chartered Engineer and Valuer regarding the procurement of trading goods who certified that the statements of the quantity of the Lead Ingots procured and sold are correct. The statement enclosed with the Certificate are corroborating with the statements as submitted by the appellant by letter dated 17.05.2017 during the course of investigation which was totally ignored by the Inquiry Officer as afterthought. No attempt was made to verify the authenticity of the statements submitted by the appellant during the investigation which is supported by the Certificate of Chartered. Engineer and Valuer. Hence, the demand of duty and imposition of penalty on the balance quantity of material cannot be sustained.