2017 (10) TMI 501 – GUJARAT HIGH COURT – 2017 (356) E.L.T. A20 (Guj.) – Whether the Tribunal is correct in law when the significant document submitted by the assessee corroborated by the conformational statements of the assessee are overlooked and ignored? – Held that: – It can be seen that the entire issue is based on appreciation of evidence of record and essentially one of facts. No question of law arises – appeal dismissed – decided against Revenue. – Tax Appeal No. 773 of 2017 Dated:- 28-9-2017 – MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. BIREN VAISHNAV, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr Sudhir M Mehta, Advocate ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1. Department has filed this appeal challenging the judgment of the CESTAT dated 06.03.2017 ra
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
d from 2004 to 200708 and after verification of records, the audit found that the ratio, declared by the assessee is in order and the ratio remained the same as such no show cause notice are issued for the subsequent periods. The audit officer who took objection of ratio is not able to give any correct ratio. In audit report, they have mentioned ratio of 205 whereas they have recovered the duty as per 1.8 ratio. Thus there is no base ratio of 2.5. Thereafter audit has also been conducted in the year 2009 and 2010 by Central Excise Audit Section as well as A.G. Audit and ratio was found in order as declared by the assessee and further no any objection was taken by the audit party. Thus the subsequent show cause notice was not required to be
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =