Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (3) TMI 194 - AT - Central ExciseStock discrepancy warranted enhancement of demand plea of the appellant that stock taking was done in dark is false when there was thread bare examination of the evidence made - Held that:- Adjudicating authority shall first deal with the outcome of the physical inventory,and outcome of the hard disk of the computer. Secondly,the outcome of the loose slips shall be examined in detail to arrive at the proper duty demand if any, to serve the interest of justice. Thirdly, he shall examine the contents of the notebook and evaluate the evidence thereofto arrive at the duty demand, if any. It may so happen that all the three materials and evidence may corroborate with each other.That aspect may be specifically dealt. Revenue is not required to lay evidence with mathematical precision.Preponderance of probability comes to itsrescue.It may use primary, corroborative and probable evidence to examine the allegations and considering defence plea shall determine dutiability if any. Therefore, the authority shall independently apply his mind without being guided by the appellate finding of lower appellate authoritywho made partial remand of the matter. So far as the second show-cause notice is concerned, if that is different from the first show-cause notice, the authority shall properly deal with that independently or in combination with the first show-cause notice. He has to clearly bring out the status of each show-cause notice and allegation made therein dealt thoroughly in his reasoned and speaking order.
|