2007 (3) TMI 173 - AT - Central Excise

Clandestine removal as held by adjudicating authority is remanded because opportunity of cross-examination was not given to appellant Excess of stock No evidence shown by assessee to prove its bonafide so first appellate order confirming demand on excess stock is sustainable

Summary

Issues:
1. Allegation of clandestine removal of 3.5 MT iron and steel product.
2. Allegation of excess stock of 486.845 MT.

Analysis:
1. The Appellant challenged the order confirming the allegation of clandestine removal of 3.5 MT iron and steel product. The Lower Appellate Authority found that the appellant's sister concern issued a challan to escape scrutiny, abetting the commission of the offense. The Appellant argued that the findings were baseless without evidence. The Appellate Tribunal noted the lack of evidence establishing the interconnected relation between the appellant and the sister concern. The matter was remanded for further examination and cross-examination to establish the alleged clandestine removal.

2. Regarding the excess stock allegation of 486.845 MT, the Appellant failed to provide convincing evidence or explanation to prove its bona fide. The Revenue proved the excess stock through excise records and physical quantity examination. The Appellate Tribunal confirmed the demand on the value of the excess goods found. The duty liability and penalty quantum were to be re-determined by the Lower Appellate Authority. The appeal was partly allowed, remanding the matter for further proceedings.