2005 (6) TMI 469 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Confiscation of currency seized from the premises.
2. Excess receipt of inputs and clearance of finished goods without duty.
3. Reliance on private record and movement of registered trucks for evidence.

Analysis:
1. Confiscation of Currency:
The case involved the recovery of a significant amount from the Director's premises, suspected to be related to the clearance of excisable goods without duty payment. The appellants clarified the source of the money, and subsequent statements supported this explanation. The Tribunal found that the confiscation of the currency was not justified as there was no evidence of shortage of inputs or clearance of final products without duty payment.

2. Excess Receipt of Inputs and Clearance of Finished Goods without Duty:
The appellants were accused of not accounting for a substantial quantity of raw materials and clearing finished goods without paying duty. Discrepancies between the statutory records and private records were noted. The Tribunal examined various slips recovered from the Director, comparing the quantities of inputs mentioned in them with the statutory records. It was found that the entries in the private records were approximate and did not accurately reflect the actual stock position. The appellants provided detailed charts showing the clearance of goods on duty payment, albeit with some discrepancies in customer names. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the demand based on excess raw material receipt and duty-free finished goods clearance was not sustainable.

3. Reliance on Private Record and Truck Movements:
The Revenue relied on the private record to argue that the stock position was higher than recorded in statutory documents. Additionally, the movement of registered trucks was cited as evidence of finished goods clearance without duty payment. The appellants contested these claims, stating that the excess raw material received was used in production, and the trucks may have been used for various purposes other than carrying finished goods. The Tribunal noted the discrepancies in stock quantities but emphasized that the private record entries were approximate. The lack of concrete evidence linking truck movements to duty-free goods clearance led the Tribunal to rule in favor of the appellants.

In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeals on the grounds that there was no shortage of inputs, no clearance of final products without duty payment, and insufficient evidence to support the confiscation of the currency.