Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2009 (1) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2009 (1) TMI 653 - AT - Central Excise

Issues:
Revenue's appeal against shortage of molasses, duty demand, interest, and penalty imposition.

Analysis:
1. The case involved a dispute regarding a shortage of 122.997 MTs of molasses found during stock verification. The Revenue issued a show cause notice proposing duty demand, interest, and penalty. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand, leading to the respondent's appeal against the decision.

2. The Revenue contended that the shortage was admitted, and no justification was provided by the respondent. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the impugned order based on various grounds, including the quantification of the shortage and the lack of evidence supporting clandestine clearance.

3. The respondent argued that the shortage was not substantiated with positive evidence and was merely a notional assumption. The record-keeping of molasses was based on presumption, and duty was paid on exact quantities cleared, according to the respondent's advocate.

4. The Commissioner (Appeals) highlighted discrepancies in the quantification of the shortage and the estimation of molasses quantities. The lack of clear evidence of clandestine clearance led to the decision to set aside the duty demand, interest, and penalty imposed by the Revenue.

5. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, emphasizing that the Revenue failed to provide contrary evidence to dispute the findings. The storage of molasses in kutcha pits was acknowledged to be susceptible to natural fluctuations, and the Revenue did not prove unauthorized removal of molasses without duty payment.

6. Ultimately, the Tribunal found no infirmity in the Commissioner (Appeals) order, deemed it legally sound, and rejected the Revenue's appeal, thereby setting aside the duty demand, interest, and penalty imposed on the respondent.

This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive overview of the issues involved, the arguments presented by both parties, and the reasoning behind the final decision rendered by the Tribunal.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates