9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 1488X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... challenging the confirmation of demand of duty to the extent of Rs. 19,52,225/- by the authorities below. The assessee was engaged in the manufacture of cigarettes with the brand name 'Midland'. The appellant's factory was closed down in September 2009. At that time the assessee had stock of midland brand cigarettes. After the production operation of the assessee was closed the factory of the appellant was sealed by the Department on 04.10.2010. While the factory was closed and sealed, the assessee received an export order from UAE for the complete stock of cigarettes left in the factory.. They applied for permission from the Department to clear the goods for export. There was a burglary at the factory premises which was noticed on 29.10.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ory which was already sealed and closed, 163 CFCs of cigarettes were reported to be lost as a result of burglary / theft. It is further on record that there was a seizure of 25 CFCs of Midland brand of cigarettes after the date when the loss of cigarettes was noticed. These 25 CFCs of cigarettes were subsequently claimed by the appellant as part of the goods stolen from their premises. The Department had taken the view that the cigarettes were not lost due to burglary but have been cleared clandestinely without payment of duty. Commissioner (A) in the impugned order held that there is no evidence to allege clandestine removal on the part of the assessee. He held as follows: "In the light of foregoing, I am of considered view that the inve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 33) ELT 517 (Tri) and in the case of CCE Patna Vs. Bihar State Sugar Corporation 1985 (19) ELT 179 (Tri). 7. From the records of the case, I find that Commissioner (A) has declined to consider the request of the appellant for grant of remission for the reason that this is not the subject matter of the proceedings before him. I further find that the appellant has lodged an FIR with the Police Department alleging theft in his factory. It is also likely that police by now would have concluded the investigations into the allegation of burglary and their conclusion may be available. 8. In the show cause notice as well as order in original the main allegation which has been considered and discussed is that the appellant has clandestinely cleare ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
