9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 718X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manager of M/s. Jaideep Ispat & Alloys Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Moira Steel Ltd., respectively. The above four units were visited by the jurisdictional Central Excise Officers on 13.10.2009 and stock of the inputs and finished goods were checked. Weight of MS Ingots in each factory was determined by first weighing certain number of ingots and determining their average weight and thereafter multiplying the average weight of one ingot by the number of ingots found in stock. On this basis in the factory of Shivangi Estate Ltd. excess stock was determined as 13.828 MT as against RG-1 Register balance of 54.285 MT. In the factory of M/s. Jaideep Ispat & Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Pithampur, Unit-I, excess stock was determined as 56.804 MT as against RG-1 Regist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ingots had been weighed and thereafter the total weight of ingots in stock had been determined by multiplying the average weight of one ingot by the number of ingots in stock, that this method of determining weight of finished goods in stock is not 100% correct and there would always be some variation between the weight determined by this method and the actual weight, that in view of this, alleged excess of MS ingots is not real excess and hence confiscation of the goods on this account and imposition of penalty on the appellant company as well as its Director/Managers, is not sustainable, more so, when the penalty imposed on the appellant is more than the duty involved on the alleged excess stock, that Tribunal in case of Nilesh Steel & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hereafter total weight was determined by multiplying the average weight by the number of ingots in stock, that this method of determining weight of MS ingots in stock is fairly accurate and difference between the weight determined by this method and the actual weight would be negligible. He, therefore, pleaded that the appellant have deliberately not-accounted for excess stock and hence the same has been correctly confiscated and penalty has been correctly imposed. He accordingly pleaded that these cases do not warrant the waiver from the requirement of pre-deposit. 5. I have considered the submissions from both the sides and perused the records. So far as Shivangi Estates Ltd. is concerned excess stock in their case is 25% as against the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
