9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 161X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s were actually used during the manufacture of the final products - the usage of various iron and steel items is to be analysed in light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. [2010 (7) TMI 12 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]. Shortage of finished goods detected during the stock verification - Held that:- There is no force in the submission of the ld. Advocate, as it was not substantiated by any evidence. The demand of duty is required to be upheld. Appeal allowed in part. - Appeal No. E/76850/2017 - FO/76049/2018 - Dated:- 9-5-2018 - Shri P.K. Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri N.K. Choudhary, Advocate for the for the Appellant/Applicant (s) Shri H.S. Abedin, AC(AR) R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 3. The ld. Advocate for the appellant submitted that there was an extra layer of pipings/risings formed on the edges of the ingots. Such layers of pipings/risings were removed later after the finished goods had been weighed, and it was due to the removal of such extra layers of piping/ risings that there was an apparent difference between the weight recorded in the register and the weight of the actual stock. He further submitted that Shri Sandip Agarwal was not involved in the day to day functioning of the factory and therefore, his statement should not be relied upon. He also stated that the appellant had submitted a certificate from the Chartered Engineer according to which they were el ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2001 (132) ELT 3 (SC), which lays down the ratio in determining whether particular goods could be categorised as capital goods or not. 7. Regarding the shortage of finished goods detected during the stock verification, I do not find any force in the submission of the ld. Advocate, as it was not substantiated by any evidence. The demand of duty is required to be upheld. I find that in order to impose penalty under section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, it is necessary to prove that there was fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of duty on the part of the appellant. There is no material available on record of clandestine removal of goods of the shortage quantity. 8. Accordingly, I up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
