9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 426X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ual stock verification for the year 1986-87 & 1987-1988, it was noticed that there was a shortage of 1413 MT of finished products billets, etc. and 1622 MT of semi-finished product of iron and steel. The show cause notice dated 05.03.1991 was issued and vide Order-in-Original dated 12.03.2007 demand of Rs. 11,07,775/- was confirmed along with applicable interest and imposed penalty under Rule 173Q (1)(b) equal to the amount of duty. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the assessee's appeal on limitation, hence the present appeal. 3. Ld. Counsel on behalf of the respondent, submitted that the demand cannot be made under Rule 223A, because under Rule 223A the Commissioner is supposed to order verification of stock of the finish ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hed and the department is in appeal only on the point of limitation and have not challenged on merits. Regarding the shortage of stock of semi-finished goods for 1622 MT, the Ld. Advocate submits that semi-finished or to be precise, in process materials are mostly in hot condition. The materials are lying in rolling bed, in furnace, for annealing/pickling, heat treatment. The weight of these materials are taken on certificate basis i.e. theoretical weight. So in true sense, the shortages in semi-finished materials does not carry any sense. The materials in semi-finished condition further passes through finishing process to be fit for dispatch to the customers/stockyard and the ultimate weight of the said materials is arrived at the finishin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ased on actual weighment. Physical stock is also based on estimation of weight on the basis of volumetric estimate and conversion to theoretic weight based on sectional weight. A comparison between two estimation is inherently inaccurate. 5. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 6. The Commissioner (Appeals) observed as under: "The Central Government, drawing from this ratio of the CEGAT judgment, held that. Rule 223A and Section 11A of the Act have to be construed accordingly. Under Section 11A 3(C ), the relevant date for computing the limitation is the date on which the duty is to be paid. The duty in this case becomes payable on the date of the stock taking under Rule 223A. Therefore, the date of stock taking of goods is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
