(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI)
1. We have heard Mr.R.J.Oza, learned Senior counsel assisted by Ms.Rujuta Oza, appearing for the appellant.
2. Admit. We formulate the following substantial questions of law.
1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has committed substantial error of law by holding that the case of the revenue is based upon surmises and conjectures even though the revenue has proved its case with aid of evidence procured in course of investigation such as statements of various persons involved in illicit manufacture and clandestine removal of the goods of the respondent, documentary evidence HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Fri Mar 11 01:26:55 IST 2016 TAXAP/1156/2011 2/2 ORDER such as invoice, books of accounts seized from the premises of the respondent and its group companies, documentary evidences collected from the transporters, experts opinion ?
2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has committed substantial error of law by holding that clandestine removal of goods by an SSI unit through its group company has to be established by strict proof of evidence and demand of duty from the respondent cannot be sustained on the basis of circumstantial evidences existing on record ?
3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has committed substantial error of law by disregarding corroborative evidence such as statement of drivers of transport company expert opinion by Man Made Textile Research Association (MANTRA), Surat and professor Shri M.A.Shenoy,Mumbai University, Institute of Chemical Technology, Mumbai and such other various statements connecting live link of transaction between the respondent and its group trading companies for clandestine removal of goods without payment of duty in the market ?
2. Issue notice to the respondents. Paper book be filed within three months.
(V.M.SAHAI,J) (N.V.ANJARIA,J) ***vcdarji HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Fri Mar 11 01:26:55 IST 2016