2006 (7) TMI 309 - HC - Central Excise

Shortage of duty paid input- The question sought to be raised by the appellant revolves around the method of payment, erroneous estimation of shortfall in weight arrived at by the department and that the conclusion that clandestine removal of duty paid inputs. Held that- we do not see any substantial question of law involved in this matter. In the result, appeal is dismissed in limine with no order as to costs.

Summary

Issues:
1. Method of payment and estimation of shortfall in weight.
2. Clandestine removal of duty paid inputs.

Analysis:
The appellant raised concerns regarding the method of payment, erroneous estimation of weight shortfall, and the conclusion of clandestine removal of duty paid inputs. The High Court examined the material on record, including statements from individuals involved in the factory operations. One individual, Mr. Biswas, confirmed and approved the method of stock taking and quantity estimation by the department, indicating that the appellant could not dispute it at this stage. Another director, Mr. Singh, acknowledged the shortage of inputs and raw materials, attributing it to burning loss during storage. The authorities, including the Tribunal, analyzed the evidence and upheld the conclusions based on the statements provided.

The Tribunal's decision was deemed well-founded as it was supported by the evidence available on record. The findings regarding clandestine removal or short receipt of duty paid inputs were upheld as well. The High Court concluded that there was no substantial question of law involved in the matter and dismissed the appeal with no order as to costs. The judgment highlighted the importance of evidence in reaching conclusions and emphasized the significance of statements made by individuals directly involved in the factory operations.