9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 937X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... along with penalty. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Central Excise officers conducted a stock verification on 14/07/98 and checked the records and stock of finished excisable products namely V.P. Sugar and Molasses. The stock of Molasses was found tallying with the recorded book stock by tank to the effect that against recorded balance of molasses on 37,660.6qtl, the quantity estimated by the Central Excise Authority by resorting to dip method was 43,582.7qtl. Accordingly, an appropriate difference of 5,922.10qtl, was worked out. It is further contended in SCN dated 27/07/98 that the excess quantity, so found valued at Rs. 8,41,023/-. Further, at the time of stock taking there was rain and the atmosphere was cool and there was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12/98. It is not in dispute that this quantity of 961qtls, have been subsequently cleared on payment of Central Excise duty. 4. Subsequently, there was another inspection in the factory of the appellant on 10/05/99 when the stock records are checked and in the stock of molasses and excess quantity of 43.93qtls was worked out by reading to the dip method. The said alleged excess stock was seized and was handed over to Shri R.K. Sharma, Chief Chemist for safe custody. Thereafter, show cause notice dated 05/08/99 was issued alleging that in the earlier inspection dated 14/07/98, excess quantity found was 5922.1qtl, and subsequently the appellant have cleared the recorded quantity in the books that is 37,660 qtls, and was left with 961qtls of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted by the parties to the State Excise Department and such statements are verified by the State Excise authorities. The appellant have not produced any such evidence in support of their claim. It is also observed that once molasses 5922.1 qtl had been confiscated by the Central Excise authority, same has to be accounted for in the books of account, until the said order is not over looked. Subsequently, the Central Excise officers found only 961qtls of seized molasses to have been accounted for. It is therefore established that the appellant have cleared the remaining 4961.1qtls of molasses clandestinely without payment of duty. 8. Being aggrieved the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal. The learned Counsel for the appellant u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... produced today in original before this Tribunal. On going through the entries in the said register made by the State Excise authority on 15/07/98. It is seen that the said authority accepted the physical stock at 37,660.6qtls of molasses. Further, the State Excise authority have made endorsement on the register on 05/12/98 stating that on clearance of the recorded stock of molasses there is a net excess in the tank at 961qtls, being B great molasses. Under the undisputed fact that the said molasses were subsequently cleared on payment of duty, there remains no basis for the impugned order and the same is fit to be set aside. 9. The learned A.R. for revenue relies on the impugned orders. 10. Having considered the rival contentions, I hold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
