Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (10) TMI 1037 - AT - Central ExciseClandestine removal - shortage of stock - validity of relied upon documents - Held that - As the invoices recovered from the factory premises of the appellant were not relied upon in the SCN and no panchnama was drawn and relied upon by the authorities below to allege shortages, in the absence of documents, the allegation of clandestine removable is not sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues: Allegation of clandestine removal based on photocopies of invoices, certain invoices found in factory premises, and shortages during investigation. Reliance on specific documents in show cause notice.
Analysis: The appellants appealed against an order demanding duty, interest, and penalties. The case involved a search at the factory premises where photocopies of invoices and certain invoices were found, alleging goods clearance without duty payment. The show cause notice also mentioned shortages during stock verification. The appellants disputed the authenticity of the invoices and the absence of a panchnama. The Revenue argued that the show cause notice was valid based on the search findings. After hearing both sides, the tribunal noted the grounds of clandestine removal and the documents relied upon in the show cause notice. The relied-upon documents included statements and GAR forms but not the invoices found at the factory. The tribunal found the absence of reliance on crucial documents and panchnama, rendering the allegation unsustainable. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed with any consequential relief. This judgment highlights the importance of relying on specific documents in a show cause notice to support allegations of clandestine activities. The tribunal emphasized the necessity of proper documentation and adherence to procedural requirements to sustain such allegations. The decision underscores the need for a strong evidentiary basis in tax matters to ensure fairness and accuracy in duty demands and penalties.
|