TMI Blog2007 (8) TMI 610X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Commissioner stands passed in de novo proceedings when the earlier order of the Commissioner dropping charges was appealed against before the Tribunal and the matter was remanded. 2. As per the facts on record, appellants are engaged in the manufacture of gaskets and radiators falling under Chapter-87 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Their factory was visited by the Central Excise Officers on 27-5-1994, who conducted various checks and verifications and found that there were shortages in respect of some varieties of radiators and raw material was also found to be short. Proceedings were accordingly initiated against the appellant. 3. The appellant during the course of de novo proceedings raised the following contentions before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rly ascertained by the investigating team. The very fact that after such adjustment no excess or shortage remains itself proves our point that as such there was no variation in stock but radiator types were wrongly considered by the investigating officer. (g) As regards to discrepancies in inputs the assessee reiterated that they were not availing credit of all the raw materials. Entire stock is entered in cardex system, whether modvatable or non-modvatable. If the physical stock had been compared, with cardex stock, it was matching exactly. But the department compared with the stock recorded in RE23A Part I. (h) There is no evidence of despatch of such goods, receipt of such goods by any recipient or proof of payment received by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l.)] has held that distance between may be true and must be true is long and is required to be covered by legal and unimpeachable evidence before a person can be held to be guilty of clandestine removal. It was also observed that shortages alleged to be detected during the course of verification of stocks cannot be made the sole basis for arriving at a finding of clandestine removal. There are other precedent decisions on the said issue and the law stands settled. Inasmuch as there is no other corroborative evidences to show any clandestine removal of goods on the part of the appellant, I find no justification for upholding the impugned order. The same is accordingly set aside and appeal is allowed with consequential relief. (Pronounc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
