Page 135 - ELT_15th June 2020_VOL 372_Part 6th

2020 ] PAN PARAG INDIA LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA 813

are getting more remuneration than what is shown in the books of account by the
noticee, then these statements ought to have been reduced in writing and they
must be referred in the show cause notice. Copies of the gist of the statements
should be given to the noticee and those employees must be kept to have been
followed by the respondents department. Instead of doing this exercise, allega-
tion has been levelled that there is low remuneration paid by the noticee, is not
sufficient at all.
7. The Order-in-Original is based upon mere presumptions and possibili-
ties, and, nothing has been proved at all by the respondents, especially unaccounted
manufacturing of M.S. Ingots and the clandestine removal thereof.
8. The documents which are referred to in the show cause notice and
relied upon, should have been supplied to the petitioners. These documents are :-
Nucleus Group report. The document has been referred in the show cause notice
dated 7-2-2014 (Annexure-1). Imaginary is the basis of the show cause notice and
without proof, the Order-in-Original has been passed in the same breath.
9. We, therefore, quash and set aside the Order-in-Original passed by the
Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Jamshedpur dated 27-2-2015/13-3-2015
(Annexure-3 to the memo of this writ petition).
10. As a cumulative effect, as the Order-in-Original passed by the
Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Jamshedpur dated 27-2-2015/13-3-
2015 (Annexure-3 to the memo of this writ petition) is quashed and set aside, the
matter is remanded for adjudication of the show cause notice dated 7-2-2014 and the
matter will be decided afresh, keeping in mind the aforesaid principles, especial-
ly if the respondents are relying upon Dr. N.K. Batra’s report, the experiment
shall be carried out at the premises of petitioner-unit, as stated hereinabove, for
manufacturing of one ton or any such quantity which should be sufficiently
large, so as to understand the pattern of consumption of electricity for manufac-
turing of M.S. Ingots as well as keeping in mind the nature of evidences as re-
ferred in para 5(v) may also be collected as far as possible.
11. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and disposed of.
_______

2020 (372) E.L.T. 813 (Gau.)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Achintya Malla Bujor Barua, J.
PAN PARAG INDIA LTD.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA
Case No. W.P. (C) 873 of 2017, decided on 8-3-2018
Gutka - Exemption to Units situated in North Eastern States - Invest-
ment made in the form of plant and machinery on or before 31-3-2005 can be
withdrawn after ten years under Clause (F) of Notification No. 8/2004-C.E. -
Petitioner entitled to remove such capital investments made prior to 31-3-2005
after 31-3-2015 in the form of plants and machineries - Section 11 of Central
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th June 2020  135