9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 1253X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Eastern Zonal Bench, Kolkata, West Bengal, (the Tribunal) in Excise Appeal No.76345 of 2018. The department has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration: "i) Whether the Learned Tribunal committed substantial error of law by not holding that there was a mismatch between the consumed quantity of inputs between respondent's stock account of raw materials i.e. RG 23A Pt. 1 and ER-6 return for the period 2012-13 to 2015-16 ? ii) Whether there are gross inconsistencies in the records maintained by the respondent and the respondent failed to disclose any substantive evidence against such inconsistencies and/or failed to clarify the same ? iii) Whether the respondent availe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and other fruit based drinks in all its units. Further, the assessee stated that it transferred various raw materials between its units in the same complex and recorded the same in its stock records for both the units i.e., the transferring unit and the receiving unit. Further, the assessee stated that for the purposes of excise, all units are treated as one single unit and hence the inter-unit stock transfer is netted off as the same is merely an accounting entry and accordingly in ER 6. The assessee reports the netted off consumption of the principal raw material. Further, the assessee stated that the allegation of difference in consumption of raw material between the stock record and ER 6 for the period in question is without any substa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch was not correctly interpreted. Thus, it was stated that there is no difference whatsoever in consumption of raw material as per ER 6 and as per stock records maintained by the assessee. Further, it was submitted that based on assumption and presumption, the show cause notice could not have been issued well beyond the period of limitation and the extended period of limitation could not have been invoked in the facts and circumstances of the case. Before the tribunal, while filing written submission, the assessee had also filed a compilation containing all the relevant records along with stock summary to show that inter unit transfer of raw material has been shown in its stock register and the same cannot be considered as consumption in tw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sued quantity of unit-3; whereas the same is shown as inter unit receipt from unit-3 in unit-1 stock account and is also apart of total receipt of unit-1 and thereby the same will also be part of consumption of unit-1 in the column 'total issue'. Further, the tribunal was satisfied with the inter unit transfer of raw material as captured by the appellant in the stock account is netted off while filing ER 6 returns as the same is for single excise registration number and all units are treated as one single assessee. Therefore, after being satisfied with the factual position, the tribunal held that the assessee shown excess consumption of inputs in its stock records cannot be sustained. Furthermore, the tribunal noticed that the adjudicating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
