2011 (4) TMI 893 - AT - Central Excise

Improper maintenance of accounts - shortage of 64 MT of soda ash - Held that - It is not being disputed that there were production during the period form 1.6.2006 to 17.6.2006 and the raw material register was found filled upto 31.5.2006. The Commissioner (Appeals) has held that it was merely a case of improper accounting and sustained nominal penalty. Thus no valid reason to interfere with the factual finding of the Commissioner (Appeals), which is based on interpretation of statutory records in preference to the statement of authorized signatory - appeal of assessee rejected.

Summary

Issues:
Department's appeal against the Commissioner (Appeals) order regarding duty confirmation, penalty imposition, and improper accounting.

Analysis:
The appeal pertains to a case where the department challenged the Commissioner (Appeals) order concerning duty confirmation, penalty imposition, and accounting irregularities. The respondents' factory was inspected, revealing a shortage of 64 MT of soda ash. The authorized signatory admitted to goods being cleared without invoices or duty payment, which was later rectified. A show cause notice was issued, proposing duty confirmation and penalty imposition. The original authority upheld the demand and penalty, which was partially overturned by the Commissioner (Appeals), who imposed a nominal penalty for accounting lapses.

Upon review, the Tribunal noted discrepancies in the show cause notice, lack of reference to stock records, and delayed issuance. The respondents argued that the notice was flawed as raw material issue during a specific period was overlooked. The Commissioner (Appeals) found the inputs and RG-1 registers updated till certain dates, indicating regular production. The Tribunal concurred with the Commissioner's factual findings, emphasizing proper record interpretation over the signatory's statement. Notably, no evidence was presented to challenge the Commissioner's conclusions, with earlier submissions supporting the production and accounting records' integrity.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the department's appeal, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) decision based on accurate record assessment and minor accounting discrepancies. The judgment emphasizes the importance of statutory records in determining liability over verbal statements, ultimately affirming the nominal penalty for improper accounting practices.