9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 1138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jindal Revenue has filed these appeals against the impugned orders wherein the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) drop the charge of clandestinal removal goods against the respondent. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the case of Revenue is that during the physical verification of the stock of raw material on 8.12.2005 there was a shortage of C.R. Sheets/H.R. Sheets and scrap. While scrutinizing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Court has remanded matter back to this Tribunal holding that the matter be decided afresh after granting the opportunity to both the parties. Hence, these appeals. 4. The Ld. AR submits that the verification of stock was conducted with the active participation of two employees and the Director of the Company, who did not raise any objection for the method of physical stock verification and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t there was no shortage of bought out items which are required to manufacture the finished goods. Out of the raw material found that short the finished goods cannot be manufactured. Therefore, the demand is not sustainable. He further submitted that the computer prints which have been relied by the Revenue are not admissible, as no procedure prescribed under Section 36(B) of the Central Excise Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en relied upon to alleged clandestinal removal of goods but no procedure prescribed under Rule 36 (B) Central Excise Act, 1944 has been followed. Therefore, the computer prints out are not reliable documents. 8. With these observations, I hold that the charge of the clandestinal removal of goods is not sustainable against the respondents. Accordingly I do not find any infirmity with the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
