2008 (6) TMI 540

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ondent. [Order]. - The relevant facts of the case as on record, in brief, are that the respondents were engaged in the manufacture of Rigid PVC Plain Films, Metallised Polyester Films. On 16-3-2005, the Central Excise officers visited the factory of the respondents and conducted stock verification. The Central Excise officers ascertained the shortage of finished goods. The respondents immedia .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the duty before issue of show cause notice. 3. The learned Advocate submits that there is no allegation of clandestine removal of goods. He further submits that the Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of CCE, Ludhiana v. Omkar Steel Tubes (P) Ltd. reported in 2008 (221) E.L.T. 200 (P H), after considering the decision of Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Machino Montell (I) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of Omkar Steel Tubes (P) Ltd. (supra) after considering the decision of Machino Montell (supra) held that in such situation, penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Act is not warranted. Revenue has failed to produce any evidence of clandestine removal of material by the respondents. So, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Comm .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X