CEA No.46 of 2005 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CEA No.46 of 2005 DATE OF DECISION: February 22, 2010 COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE, CHANDIGARH ...APPELLANT VERSUS M/S DEV SPINNERS LTD., DERABASSI ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR. PRESENT: MR. KAMAL SEHGAL, SR. PANEL COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT. NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT. ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(ORAL) The Revenue has impugned the order dated 2.6.2004, passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal') vide which the appeal filed by the Revenue against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) was dismissed and it was held that the goods of the respondent could not be confiscated as goods were duty paid. A perusal of the orders passed by the Commissioner as well as the Tribunal shows that the respondents who are engaged in the manufacture of cotton and cotton yarn had sent two trucks carrying goods on 28.2.2000. The aforementioned goods were duty paid. The goods which were being carried into trucks were inspected by the officers of Central Excise and the officers found that the goods were being cleared without payment of duty. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) has recorded a CEA No.46 of 2005 -2- categorical finding of fact that the goods were duty paid and further that invoices were not fake. Mr. Kamal Sehgal, counsel for the Revenue submits that the invoices of the goods, which were recovered from the driver of the truck were un-authenticated and were fake. However, a perusal of the impugned order shows that nature of the goods was not disputed by the Department and that there was nothing on record to show that invoices produced were fake. The explanation of the respondent was duly accepted by the Commissioner that the goods of one category got mixed with goods of any other category. In view of findings of fact recorded by both Commissioner as well as the Tribunal, we find no merit in this appeal. Accordingly no question of law arise in the present appeal as the matter being adjudicated upon is simply factual in nature. Appeal dismissed. (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE February 22, 2010 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) Gulati JUDGE