9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 660X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion. Therefore, the case of clandestine removal cannot be sustained against the appellant. In view of non-availability of very basis of stock taking and physical impossibility of going through the process of weighment of about 250 MTs of M.S. Bars within 2 hours and also arriving at the physical stock upto Kg. level without explaining how measurement was made creates serious lacunae and seriously affected the very basis of revenue's allegation. - Decided in favour of appellant - Excise Appeal No. E/50317/2015-EX(SM) - Final Order No. 52447/2016 - Dated:- 12-7-2016 - Shri B. Ravichandran, Member ( Technical ) Ms. Rinki Arora, Advocate for the appellant Shri M.R. Sharma, AR for the respondent ORDER Per B. Ravichandran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... firmed. Ld. Counsel also relied on certain decided cases in support of her plea. 3. Ld. AR supported the findings of the lower authorities and stated that non-availability of finished goods has to be explained by the appellant which they have failed to do. The physical shortage supported by the statement of Shri Gupta, partner of the appellant-firm makes it a clear case of clandestine clearance. 4. Heard both the sides and examined the appeal records. 5. I find that the case mainly rests on alleged shortage of finished products during physical verification. The total quantity should have been 290.597 as per the records maintained by the appellant. On physical verification, the stock was found to be 245.597 MT resulting in a shortag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng at the physical stock upto Kg. level without explaining how measurement was made creates serious lacunae and seriously affected the very basis of revenue s allegation. The Tribunal in Raj Ratan Industries Ltd. 2013 (292) ELT 123 (T-Delhi) held that the allegation of clandestine removal in such type of cases are to be established by production of concrete and tangible evidence. In the said case also, the appellant admitted the stock taking and agreed to pay the excise duty. Later, it was found that the stock taking was not done on actual basis. 6. Considering the above analysis and facts of the present appeal, I find that the case of clandestine removal cannot be sustained against the appellant in view of the reasons discussed above. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
