9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 195X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edit amounting to Rs. 13,82,054. The respondent paid the said amount immediately within a fortnight except for Rs. 44,042/- involving alleged removal of 99.09 MT against delivery challan dated 17.01.2007. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed and penalty of equivalent amount was imposed. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent filed an appeal before the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) challenging the confirmation of demand and imposition of penalty. The ld.Commissioner(Appeals) after analyzing the evidences on record set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal. Aggrieved by the said order, the Revenue is in appeal before this forum. 3. The ld.AR for the Revenue assailing the impugned order-in-appeal submitted that the ld.Commissin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consignee mentioned in the said challan as to whether the goods were received by the said consignee. Therefore, the order of the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) does not suffer from any infirmity, hence be upheld. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. I find that on the date of visit of the officers on 18.01.2007, a joint stock verification was carried out whereunder finished goods, namely, ingots weighing 253.763 MT involving total duty of Rs. 6,21,212/- and various raw materials like sponge iron, pig iron and scrap totally weighing 480.660 MT involving CENVAT Credit of Rs. 7,16,800/- were found short. On recording the statement of the factory manager Shri Subhash Agarwal on the same day and also later no proper explanation could be furni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... corded, I find that nowhere the said question was asked to the Manager or the Director by the investigating officer. In these premises, it is difficult to hold that the goods mentioned in the said challan dated 17.01.2007 were cleared clandestinely without payment of duty. Further, I find that penalty was imposed under section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 by the adjudicating authority and confirmed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). Penalty was not confirmed under any other provision nor also invoked in the show cause notice. Accordingly, confirmation of penalty cannot be sustained. The Revenue s Appeal is thus partly allowed to the extent of confirmation of duty on the shortages in the stock of finished goods and raw materials amountin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
