9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 322X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DR, for the Respondent. ORDER The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of MS Bar. Their factory was visited by the officers on 22-12-2007, who conducted various checks and verifications. As a result shortage of the bars to the extent of 131.60 MT, totally valued at Rs. 33,38,560/- involving Central Excise duty of Rs. 5,50,195/- was detected. 2. Statement of Shri Ashish Sharma, Company S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the duty and imposing penalty of Rs. 5,50,195/- under Section 11AC of the Act. No penalty was imposed under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Hence the present appeal. 4. After hearing both the sides duly represented by Shri Manish Saharan, Advocate for the applicants and Shri R.K. Mishra, DR for the respondent, I find that the challenge in the present appeal is only to imposition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... register. Having entered their manufactured goods in the daily account register it was not possible for the appellant to clear the same, without making entries in the said register and without issuing the invoices. It is also a fact that the previous day was Eid day and as such was off day. Though I agree with the ld. AR that, if that be so, they could not have cleared their goods on a holiday. H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds were cleared without payment of duty and without raising the invoices, though may be, under compelling circumstances, thus inviting penal action under Rule 25. The said rules stand invoked in the show cause notice, though not adopted by adjudicating authority. 8. By taking into account, the overall facts and circumstances of the case and by extending the benefit of doubt, I am of the view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
