TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 707X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder]. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the Respondents are engaged in the manufacture of M.S. Pipes classifiable under Chapter 73 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. On 8-12-2001, the Central Excise Officers visited the Respondent s factory and conducted stock verification. The said officers found shortage of stocks of inputs. The Respondents admitted t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana v. Omkar Steel Tubes (P) Ltd. - 2008 (221) E.L.T. 200 (P H) and Commissioner of Central Excise v. Electrolus Kelvinator Ltd. reported in 2006 (206) E.L.T. 1137 (P H) = 2008 (11) S.T.R. 216 (P H). 4. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, it is seen that on 8-12-2001, the Central Excise Officers detected the shortage ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appeals) that the show cause notice issued after 3 years of the visit by the officers to the factory without giving any reason for not issuing show cause notice upon detection of the alleged clandestine removal of the goods. In view of that, I do not find any reason to interfere the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected. (Order dictated and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
