2017 (3) TMI 1279 - AT - Central Excise

Clandestine removal - Revenue says that the demand based upon some weighment slips of the Dharma kanta - Held that - the demand confirmed by the adjudicating authority is not solely based upon weighment slips or weighment register of the dharma kanta. All the weighment slips have been taken as a corroborative evidence by the adjudicating authority, the loose chits/ papers which stand recovered from the appellants premises and wherein all the details have been given. As such, he has not confirmed the demand exclusively based on weighment slips - weighment slips have been found to be not sufficient evidence to confirm the balance demand inasmuch as there is no corroboration to the same - also, there is nothing on record to show that the trucks were loaded with the iron and steel items, which is the appellants final product - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues: Allegation of clandestine removal of goods based on weighment slips and evidentiary requirements for confirming demands.

In this case, the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI dealt with an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order passed by the Commissioner regarding the alleged clandestine removal of iron and steel products by the appellants. The officers conducted checks at the factory premises and a nearby dharm kanta, suspecting clandestine clearances. The Commissioner confirmed a demand of &8377; 1,98,921.00 based on recovered loose chits and weighment slips, indicating clandestine clearances. However, a larger demand of &8377; 58,14,587.00 was dropped due to lack of concrete evidence linking the weighment register entries to the actual removal of iron and steel articles. The Commissioner also dropped another demand of &8377; 5,51,460.00 as there was no substantial evidence proving the alleged lesser quantity invoiced for the goods removed clandestinely.

The Tribunal analyzed the evidentiary value of the weighment slips and found that while they were considered corroborative evidence by the Commissioner for one demand, they were insufficient to confirm the other demands. The Commissioner's order was deemed consistent as it did not solely rely on weighment slips but also took into account other details from recovered documents. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, noting the lack of corroboration between the weighment slips and the actual loading of iron and steel items onto trucks. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, finding no merit in their argument and affirming the Commissioner's order.

In conclusion, the judgment highlights the importance of concrete evidence and corroboration in establishing allegations of clandestine removal of goods. The case underscores the necessity for affirmative and cogent evidence to support demands based on weighment slips, emphasizing the need for a thorough investigation and verification process to substantiate such claims in excise matters.