9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 527X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... RG-1 register, but till the date aforesaid record have not been received by him. It is further observed that from perusal of correspondence between Adjudication Branch of Central Excise, Meerut-II and Adjudication Branch of Central Excise, Noida, copies of which were endorsed to the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), it was evident that the documents are still not traceable and/or readily available despite a lapse of more than five years. In order to confer substantial Justice the ld. Commissioner set aside the Order-in-Original and remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority with the direction to decide the case within three months, after providing the appellants the relevant RG 23 part-I register and RG-1 register and thereafter affo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said order is not sustainable. Accordingly, I set aside the Order-in-Appeal and the Order-in-Original and allow the appeal. The appellant assessee will be entitled to consequential benefits, in accordance with law. So far the pre-deposits or the payment of duty pending adjudication or appeal is concerned, the same are refundable to the appellant along with interest, as per Rules - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-assessee. - E/60181/2013-EX[SM] - FINAL ORDER NO-70821/2016 - Dated:- 5-9-2016 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri Devinder Sharma, Advocate for Appellant Shri Rajeev Ranjan, Joint Commissioner (AR), for Respondent ORDER The issue in this appeal is whether delay in making dispatch ent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng Monday. 2.3. The manufactured organic chemical were initially stored in the tanks in the manufacturing area and, thereafter, transferred either to the other manufacturing plants for further manufacture of other goods or to the tanks in the bonded storage area, for removal from the factory. Similarly, the emulsions were initially stored in the blenders and filled into barrels in the manufacturing areas and, thereafter, the filled barrels were transferred to the bonded storage area. The good stored in the manufacturing area were accounted for in the RG1 as finishing room stock and the goods stored in the bonded storage area were accounted for as bonded store room stocks. The goods manufactured or transferred during the day (6.00 AM TO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... age area for further dispatch. However, while ascertaining the physical stock of Acetic Acid, the team did not include the quantity of materials, which had been loaded in the trucks parked in the factory. The Comparative stock statement prepared by the team is reproduced below: S.No Product Physical Stock RG1 Stock in Bonded Area (15/03/97) Difference Value 1 VAM 481928.70 465492.75 16435.95 756054 2 Acetic Acid 541311.09 697504.10 -156193.01 23,4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been found short when compared with the physical stock in the bonded store room as compared with the RG-1 register. Accordingly, Central Excise Duty for ₹ 4,21,831/- was demanded in respect of goods found short alleging removal without payment of proper Central Excise Duty and further for goods Vamtex- 33, 750 Kg, PVA-5040.150 Kg, Vam-16435.950 Kg, construction chemical-4335 Kg along with truck No. UP-21-6672 and molasses weighing 4698.585 Qtls valued at ₹ 20,06,125.50/- be not confiscated with further proposal to impose penalty on the company and Manoj Kumar, the driver of the said truck. 4. The appellant contested the SCN and the same was adjudicated without supplying, the relied upon documents vide Order-In-Original dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cond Order-in-Original dated 14/03/2013 was passed by the Additional Commissioner, Meerut-II. As pointed out by the learned Advocate for the appellant, it is evident on perusal of the records that the relied upon documents, as directed by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) were not provided to the appellant assessee and again the duty of ₹ 4, 21,831/- was confirmed along with confiscation of the seized goods and the seized stock with option to redeem on payment of redemption fine. However, penalty on Manoj Kumar, driver was not imposed as the amount of ₹ 3,14,060/- and ₹ 14,38,961/- were found to be admissible credit. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred appeal before ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who vide the impugned order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
