TMI Blog1983 (7) TMI 197X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12 appeals as the amount of duty involved in each case exceeds Rs. 10,000/- and the single Member Bench cannot hear those appeals. 3. These appeals were filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta. Originally, the Collector filed only one appeal by reason of the common order passed by the Collector (Appeals) and when this defect was pointed out, the Collector filed 14 appeals against 14 orders (Original). The above 12 appeals are clubbed together as they involve common questions of facts and law. Hence this common order. 4. The case of the Central Excise Department and the contentions of the Indian Oil Corporation (I.O.C.) have been set out in detail in the orders (original) as well as in the common Appellate Order. Therefore, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d when the Supdts. C.E. have condoned the losses to maximum permissible limits, the Collector (Appeals) was wholly unjustified in setting aside the orders and accepting the contention of the respondents herein and ordering consequential reliefs. Besides the above, the learned S.D.R. Shri A.K. Saha, during the hearing of the appeal, contended that under law, the respondents were required to account for the whole quantity removed from the storage tanks at the destination and the only allowance they are entitled to is condonation of transit loss to the extent prescribed in the various Government orders and that the Supdts. have allowed such condonations. Under the circumstances, the Collector (Appeals) committed an error in accepting the entir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k of the barges on all the trips. As a result the quantity unloaded at the destination will be sometimes less and sometimes more than the AR-3A quantity. He urged that I.O.C. is put to double jeopardy in that the Central Excise Department have been demanding duty for the losses but they were not giving any rebate for the gains. He also urged that consideration of loss on the basis of each AR-3A is improper and that from a long time they have been agitating before the Collector that the reconciliation of transit loss and gains relating to in-bond movement of mineral oil by barges and tankers must be allowed on annual basis as in the case of pipe-line movement and that the I.O.C. have been informed by the Collector that the matter had been re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Now from the above, it is clear, the Collector (Appeals) had taken into consideration, the mode of transport, distance covered, human errors in taking the dip measurements and the absence of evidence as to pilferage of the goods in transit. Now, it is not even the case of I.O.C. that the losses occurred due to pilferage. In the circumstances, that factor taken into consideration by the Collector (Appeals) is an irrelevant factor, in any case, not pleaded by the aggrieved party. The finding of Collector (Appeals) that the entire loss is due to natural causes is rather difficult to accept. The non-availability of stripping pumps or that the barges were not fitted with proper pumps, or that the pumps lose suction after certain operations cann ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
