9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 1124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re lying in another plot of the same job worker only for the sake of convenience - the allegation of clandestine removal does not stand and must fail. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Appeal Nos. E/2422/2010 &1900/2009-EX [SM] - Final Order Nos. 70899-70900 / 2018 - Dated:- 18-7-2017 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member ( Judicial ) Shri Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi, Asstt. Commr. (AR) for Appellant Shri Rajesh Chhibber, Advocate, for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil Choudhary These two appeals are filed by the Revenue against Orders-in-Appeal No. 57-CE/GZB/2010 dated 23/04/2010 86-CE/GZB/2008 dated 30/03/2009 both passed by Commissioner of Central Excise Customs (Appeals), Ghaziabad. Appeal No.E/2422/2010-EX ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stock of PVC Pipes of different specification lying at the said plot. On being asked about the document(s) relating to the stock of pipes, the chowkidar testified under Section 14 of the Act, that PVC Pipes are often sent by M/s Tirupati Structures Ltd. (TSL for short), A 6/5, Site-IV, Industrial Area, Sahibabad to this plot, for its subsequent clearance to different customers. Further, in the statements of Shri K.P. Chauhan, Manager-Excise and of M/s Advance Steel Tubes Ltd. Plot No.45/3, Site-IV Industry Area, Sahibabad, it is stated that the ownership of the Plot No.46/4, Site-IV Industrial Area, Sahibabad rests with M/s Advance Steel Tubes Ltd. The Panchnama was drawn on 18.09.2006 at Plot No.46/4, Site-IV Industrial Area, Sahibabad. O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... leged shortage in stock of 1,36,285 Kgs of PVC Pipes, the department, vide SI. No. (2) of grounds of appeal (appeal of the department dated 24/10/2008) has contended that as per relevant Panchnama/Verification report dated 19/09/2006, the appellants (Shri S.S. Bhatnagar, Manager Commercial) in whose presence the proceedings were conducted, did not challenge this verification report or the manner of stock taking. But I find that the appellants have been contesting that 1,46,618 Kgs. of PVC Pipes (relating to the alleged short found goods) were sent by them to M/s AST for job work (for carrying out slotting) from the stock balance of RG 1 Register. The statement dated 19/09/2006 of Shri S.S. Bhatnagar, Manager (Commercial), clearly mentions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... PVC Pipes of 1,46,610Kg found at a unit of Advance Steel Tubes Ltd. 46/4, Site, IV, Sahibabad and shortage of PVC pipes of 1,36,285Kg at TSL factory are inter connected happenings and one thing cannot be seen in isolation. In this context, the difference of 10,325 Kg of PVC Pipes (1,46,610 Kgs 1,36,285 Kgs) was contended to be on account of taking of weight by estimation only instead of actual physical verification of the stock. This contention of the appellants find support from Annexure- I to Panchnama dated 18/09/2006, which shows computation of the said quantity of 1,46,610 Kgs of PVC pipes by multiplying total number of pieces/pipes with average weight of one pipe in Kg (size wise) and it is also apparent that these figures are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... department has taken the ground that the subject goods having been accounted for in the RG. 1 Register were supposed to have been cleared on payment of duty (as final products) and the same could not be considered to have been cleared for job-work under cover of job-work challans. In this regard, it may be mentioned that as per facts placed on record viz. panchnama and statement of Shri S.S. Bhatnagar, Manager Commercial, the subject goods were reportedly cleared by the appellants for job work and therefore, the same could be treated as semi finished goods and not finished goods/final products. Further, RG 1 Register provides column for entry of goods even at semi-finished stage. Therefore, even if the subject goods were entered in RG-1 Reg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to have sent to on job of challan to M/s Advance Steel Tubes Ltd. Plot No.45/3, Site-IV, Industrial Area Sahibabad, whereas on inspection, the goods were found lying at Plot No.46/4, which also belongs to M/s Advance Steel Tubes Ltd. Further, Shri K.P. Chauhan, Manager, (Excise) of M/s Advance Steel Tube Ltd. in his statement dated 19.09.2006 admitted that there had no facility for carrying out slotting at Plot No.46/4. He also accepted the fact that they have not undertaken any slotting activity. The conclusion of the Commissioner (Appeals) is that the goods reportedly sent for job work had been entered in RG-1 register, as Semi-finished goods and no adverse inference could be drawn. It is also not supported by the facts on record, as on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
