New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (6) TMI 769 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

2016 (6) TMI 769 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT - 2016 (336) E.L.T. 277 (Cal.) - Estimation of substantial shortage of goods through visual joint stock verification - accurate verification of the stock was not conducted - Anomaly in the show cause notice - Held that:- There is no doubt that in course of the joint verification of the stock at the petitionerís manufacturing facility conducted on September 22-23, 2015 substantial shortage of goods was discovered. However, such discovery has not culminated i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r appears to have been a meaningless exercise without the petitioner being confronted with the material against the petitioner as may have been contained in the proposal forwarded by the Durgapur Commissionerate to the Chief Commissioner, the order impugned dated March 15, 2016 cannot be sustained. Accordingly, such order is liable to be set aside. However, since it is evident that the petitioner has not tendered payment of the entire sum of ₹ 1,50,05,658/- pursuant to the joint stock veri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Maiti, Adv. ORDER The Court : The grievance of the petitioner is that an order has been made by the Chief Commissioner of Central Excise under a notification of March 21, 2014 on the basis of a proposal forwarded by the Durgapur Commissionerate without a copy of such proposal being made available to the petitioner or the allegations against the petitioner that may be contained in such proposal being disclosed to the petitioner. It appears that a raid was conducted at the petitioner s manufactur .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

credit of the petitioner and the same would be subject to an order of adjudication as to the shortage of goods. The petitioner refers to a notice of November 30, 2015 issued by the office of the Chief Commissioner requiring the petitioner to show cause why appropriate steps would not be taken against the petitioner in terms of the notification of March 21, 2014. The petitioner replied to the notice of November 30, 2015 on Februrary 18, 2016 and the petitioner referred to the proposal of the Dur .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

or the purpose of forming a reasonable belief that the person has knowingly done or contravened anything specified in the first paragraph of the notification. The notification also requires the concerned person to be afforded an opportunity of hearing before an order is passed thereunder. There is no doubt that in course of the joint verification of the stock at the petitioner s manufacturing facility conducted on September 22-23, 2015 substantial shortage of goods was discovered. However, such .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sioner to resort to penal measures against the petitioner. However, it may have been possible for other anomalies to be discovered in course of the raid and there is no doubt that such other anomalies find reference in the proposal forwarded by the Durgapur Commissionerate to the Chief Commissioner. But the show-cause notice of November 30, 2015 issued by the Chief Commissioner to the petitioner did not append a copy of the proposal nor did such notice set out the salient contents of the proposa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f March 15, 2016 can be faulted for matters prejudicial to the petitioner being taken into consideration without reference to the petitioner. Neither the notice of November 30, 2015 nor in course of the opportunity afforded to the petitioner s representative of a hearing, was the proposal of the Durgapur Commissionerate or the allegations or perception as to misconduct reflected therein made known to the petitioner. Since the opportunity afforded to the petitioner appears to have been a meaningl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version