1999 (2) TMI 319 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
The issues involved in this case are the confirmation of duty against the appellants for clandestine removal of excisable goods and the imposition of a penalty, based on the recovery of loose sheets from the appellants' factory premises.

Confirmation of Duty and Penalty:
The appeal was against an order confirming duty and imposing a penalty on the appellants for clandestine removal of excisable goods based on loose sheets found at their factory. The appellants argued that the recovery of the sheets was doubtful due to lack of proper seizure formalities and witness presence. They also contested the delayed recording of statements and the authenticity of the handwriting analysis. The appellants claimed their factory was closed during the alleged period, and no other evidence supported the charge of clandestine removal. The department countered that the recovery was admitted by the appellants and discrepancies in records indicated guilt. The Tribunal considered the long duration of the case, discrepancies in recovery procedures, lack of tangible evidence, and rejected affidavits, ultimately giving the benefit of doubt to the appellants and setting aside the order.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal found discrepancies in the recovery procedures, lack of tangible evidence, and rejected affidavits, ultimately giving the benefit of doubt to the appellants and setting aside the order, allowing the appeal with consequential relief.