Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2012 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (11) TMI 1027 - AT - Central ExciseDuty demand - Shortage of M.S. Ingots - However no discrepancy in stock - Held that:- duty demand stand confirmed in respect of shortages detected at the time of visit of the officers read with the statement of Shri Vijay Kumar Agarwal. The appellants have strongly contended, the manner of weightment of the final product. It is seen that the Revenue has not produced any inventory on record to show that the weightment was actually done and the shortages were not on the basis of average weight system but real and based upon actual weightments. Similarly reliance of the Revenue on the statement of the authorized representative cannot ipso-facto lead to the inevitable conclusion of clandestine removal of final product especially when there is no variation in the stock of the raw-material. There is no other evidence on record to reflect upon the above fact - though an admission is extremely important piece of evidence, it cannot be said to be conclusive - allegations of clandestine removal are required to be established by the Revenue by production of the concrete and tangible evidence. In the present case apart from the statement of the authorized representative, there is no evidence to reflect upon the said activities - As the Revenue has failed to bring on record any evidence showing illegal manufacture and removal of their final product, I find no justification in upholding the confirmation of demand of duty or imposition of penalty on both the appellants - Following decision of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Dhingra Metal Works [2010 (10) TMI 29 - DELHI HIGH COURT] - Decided in favour of assessee.
|