9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. E/2235/2005-SM(BR) - Final Order No. 979/2007-SM(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 25-4-2007 - [Order per] - The relevant facts of the case in brief, are that, the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of readymade garments classifiable under chapter 62 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. On 4-9-2002, the Central Excise Officers visited the appellant's factory and conducted stock verification of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the adjudication order. 2. Learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant submits that Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Accounts and Excise Manager of the appellant in his statement dated 4-9-2002 on being asked explained the reason for excess of stock and no show cause notice was issued thereon. Further, Shri Shiv Rattan Goyal, Proprietor of the appellant in his statement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 97) E.L.T. 218 (Tri.-Del.) (b) TGL Poshak Corporation v. CCE, Hyderabad - 2002 (140) E.L.T. 187 (Tri.-Chennai). (c) Plastic Duniya v. CCE, New Delhi - 2005 (190) E.L.T. 381 (Tri.-Del.) (d) Rawalwasia Ispat Udyog Ltd. v. CCE, Delhi -2005 (186) E.L.T. 465 (Tri.- Del.) 3. The learned authorized representative (DR) on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the Commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e some accountal error by the staffs. I find force in the submission of the learned DR that the appellant did not produce any evidence for removal of the RG-1 stock from the bonded store room at any point of time. Therefore, the demand of duty on the appellant is justified. It is a case of detection of shortage of finished goods during the stock verification conducted by the Central Excise Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
