9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (11) TMI 474X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fications of inputs stock, the same was found to be short than the recorded balance in the statutory records. The respondent s Works Accountant Shri Manoj Kotian, in his on the spot statement stated that such differences could be on account of system error, clerical error and documentation error and the same would be reconciled by them subsequently. He also deposed that such differences were also noticed by them during internal stock verification process done on 31-12-1997, but they could not reconcile the same as they were preoccupied with the financial closing. The respondents deposited an amount of Rs. 64,43,269/- under protest towards the differences noticed in physical stock and stock shown in RG-23A Part-I. 3.On the above basis, s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the verification of the statement with contemporaneous records and statutory records can be done by the Superintendent. The Commissioner has further observed in para 8 of his order as follows :- The Superintendent (Adj.) Central Excise submitted the verification report of reconciliation statement. It was reported that regards factor at (i) the relevant entries in RG 23A Part I and Part II were checked, these entries were regards to transitional credit availed by CIL during March and April, 93, when CIL came under Central Excise regulations. Similarly the invoices against which CIL had availed only quantity credit and not the duty credit, due to technical errors in the invoices, were also checked. CIL has requested to duty quantum of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emoval of inputs from the respondent s factory. The Commissioner has relied upon various decisions in support of his findings that irregularities in the maintenance of statutory records or stock taking discrepancies or difference between physical stock and stock shown in the statutory records are no proof of clandestine removal. It is only after the discrepancies were reconciled with the help of Superintendent s report that the Commissioner has accepted the same. As such, we do not find any merits on revenue s pleading that there was no basis for him to drop the demand. As such, we are of the view that there is no infirmity in the order of the Commissioner. The revenue s appeal is accordingly rejected. (Pronounced in Court) - - TaxTMI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
