9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (8) TMI 224X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hri M. Veeraiyan, Member (T) REPRESENTED BY : Shri K.P. Singh, SDR, for the Appellant. Shri Rajesh Kumar, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order (Oral)]. - This is an appeal by the Department against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. 41-C.E./2008 dated 31-3-2008. 2.Heard both sides. 3. On last occasion that is on 5-7-2010, the learned Advocate raised a preliminary objection regarding the validity of formation of opinion by Committee of Commissioners and accordingly, the Department was directed to submit attested copies of note sheets of relevant file for perusal. On perusal of the note sheet, learned Advocate submitted that he is not pressing the preliminary objection. 4. The relevant facts, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvestigating officers. He further submits that dip reading has been taken after giving allowance to foam formation. He also submits that once the shortage was accepted during stock taking in the presence of independent witnesses, the same cannot be refuted. In support of his submissions, he relies on the following decisions :- (a) Friends Auto (India) Ltd. v. C.C.E. - 2004 (167) E.L.T. 228 (b) Bikaner Steel Industries v. C.C.E. - 2005 (188) E.L.T. 309 (c) C.C.E. v. Ratlam Wires (P) Ltd. - 2004 (174) E.L.T. 198 7. Learned Advocate for the respondents submits that molasses is hygroscopic substance; that the dip reading is an approximate process and that the stock ascertains by dip reading requires adjustment based on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the reason for adopting in two different percentages for allowance by the investigating officers have not been explained. The grounds of appeal do not disclose any material to hold that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in accepting the explanation for shortage. 9. The decisions relied upon by the learned SDR are not relevant to the facts of the present case. The present case is not a case of disputed shortage but it is the case of examining the reasons adduced by the respondents for the shortage found. While the investigating officers and the original authority did not accept the reasoning, the Commissioner (Appeals) has accepted the reasoning given by the respondents taking various relevant factors into account like non-taking ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
