2005 (10) TMI 375 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Duty demand on petroleum products due to price and duty rate revisions.
2. Contention regarding actual stock position at Hanumangarh and Jaipur depots.
3. Onus of proof on the appellant regarding stock position.
4. Evidence presented by the appellant to support their claim.
5. Decision to set aside the demand confirmed at Hanumangarh and Jaipur depots.

Analysis:

1. The appellant filed appeals against a common impugned order regarding duty demand on petroleum products following price and duty rate revisions. The revenue sought duty on goods stored at depots on specific dates when revisions occurred.

2. The appellant contested the demand for Hanumangarh and Jaipur depots, citing discrepancies in the quantities mentioned in a circular issued by the Head Office. They argued that the actual stock position differed from the circular, supported by transfer invoices and records.

3. The revenue contended that the appellant must prove the actual stock position, especially since discrepancies were raised regarding the quantities mentioned in the circular. The demand was upheld based on this premise.

4. The appellant presented evidence, including transport allowance details indicating customs cargo, gauge register data, and information on imported stock cleared with custom duty paid. They also highlighted that duty was charged based on the initial clearance rate from refineries.

5. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's evidence and set aside the demand confirmed at Hanumangarh and Jaipur depots. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for further consideration after providing an opportunity for the appellant to be heard, ultimately allowing the appeal through remand.