2017 (4) TMI 595

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... drawn for which no dispute was raised by the representative of the company who was present at the time of panchnama, all explanation given subsequently are of no help to the appellant - appeal dismissed - decided against assessee. - E/505/11 - A/86396/17/SMB - Dated:- 24-2-2017 - Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) Shri Mihir Mehta, Advocate for the appellant Shri H.M. Dixit, Asstt. C .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ein the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the original authority except setting aside the penalty imposed under Rule 13 and personal penalty on Ramesh Ranka under Rule 26. Therefore the appellant is before me. 2. Shri Mihir Mehta, ld. counsel for the appellant submits that the difference in the stock of finished goods is due to wrong method of measurement by the officers. As regards th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hould not be considered. He submits that as per the consultation of the employee of the appellant, during the panchnama the shrinkage was already considered. Therefore, there is no scope for further adjustment of quantity on account of shrinkage in respect of semi-finished goods. 4. I have carefully considered the submission made by both sides. 5. I find that the stock variation was worked o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X