9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (2) TMI 687X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Excise Officers on 27-10-98 and various checks and verifications were conducted. It was found that the total quantity of 568 bags of powder weighing 50 kgs. each were lying in stock. The appellants could not produce the records showing the entries of such bags and submitted that the same were available with his part time Munsi. However, the records were subsequently produced with entries of 568 bags. 2. At the time of investigation by the Officers, the statement of Shri Pradeep Kumar Guddewala, Proprietor of the appellants Unit was recorded. In his statement, he stated that the average production of the powder was around 200 bags per month (approximately). The statement of Shri Ramjatan Prasad Sah, Labour-in-Charge was also recorded wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he present appeal. 4. Shri B.N. Chattopadhyay, ld. Consultant appearing for the appellants, submits that the duty has been confirmed against them and the penalty imposed on the findings of the clandestine removal of the powder allegedly manufactured by the appellants during the period 1995-97 to 1997-98. He submits that during the relevant period, the appellant was availing the benefit of small scale exemption notification and had filed the declaration with the Central Excise authorities on 23-9-97 by registered post. It was also only after the receipt of the declaration that the appellants factory was visited by the Central Excise Officers. He submits that the entire case of the Revenue rests on the statement of Shri Sah, Labour-in-Char ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e same have been given to their Munsi. The said bags were subsequently entered in the records and the same were produced before the officers. He submits that this factum is sufficient to reflect upon the activities of clandestine manufacture and removal of the goods. 6. I have considered the submissions made from both sides and have gone through the impugned orders. I have also perused the statements made by the Proprietor and Labour-in-Charge. The Proprietor of the appellants unit, in his statement made at the time of visit of the officers, has clearly deposed that their average production was around 200 bags per month. However, it is the statement of Shri Sah, Labour-in-Charge which has been made the basis for arriving at the finding a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had stated that the same may be the surplus stock of the previous month inasmuch as they are some time not able to sell the goods. Similarly, non-production of records on the ground that the same were in the custody of their Munsi, may amount to raising some doubt against the appellants but cannot take the place of evidence. It is well settled that the small scale units work with limited number of workers and employ part time accountant and it is not unlikely that the account registers might have been taken by the Munsi for completion purposes. The Revenue apart from alleging that the records were subsequently completed reflecting upon the entries of 568 bags has not produced any evidence to prove the said allegations. 8. In view of the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
