TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 889X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns of the Tribunal. Without such reconciliation there is no scope for any reduction in the liability to duty on merit. Extended period of limitation - Held that: - There is also no allegation that any goods have been removed clandestinely. The scope for invoking the extended period in section 11A of CEA, 1944 does not exist in the absence of the ingredients permitting such. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/958/2008 - A/86436/17/SMB - Dated:- 17-3-2017 - Shri C J Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri Bharat Raichandani, Advocate for the appellant Shri N N Prabhudesai, Superintendent (AR) for the respondent Order M/s Kellogg India Ltd disputes the disallowance, and consequent recovery, of ineligible MO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ven an opportunity to explain the above entries before the matters decided in de novo proceeding. The issue of penalties also kept open for the Commissioner to decide on the basis of the results of his findings on moderate credit.' 2. The matter having been decided afresh, and confirmed as narrated supra, in order-in-original no. 05/COMMR./Taloja/R-V/AKP/2008-09 dated 31 st May 2008 of Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Belapur is now before the Tribunal on the second journey to ascertain if the adjudicating authority had conformed to the directions in the first round and whether the findings thereof are legally valid. 3. The appellant assails the findings in the impugned order with the assertion that there was no reaso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Sons Alloys P. Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur [2013 (291) ELT (Tri-Del)] which held that without inventorising the shortage in inputs and evidence of clandestinely removal of any shortage there is no justification for demand. Likewise attention is drawn to the decision in Atlas Conductors v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai [2008 (221) ELT 231 (Tri-Mumbai)] which held 7. It is settled law that the demand of duty has to be based on the actual manufacturing activity and cannot be made on the presumptive ground of manufacturing. It is also settled law that in the case of clandestinely removal it is the responsibility of the revenue to adduce evidence of such removal. In the current case before us the lower aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herefore, the decision cited on behalf of Revenue would not apply to a matter in which non-accountal is in dispute. It would appear that the credit had been properly taken at the time of entry of the goods into stock but its disposition thereafter, to the extent of the gaps thrown up in reconciling the RG 23A Part I and the stock ledger, is in doubt. The original authority has held that this is a clear case of inadequate accountal. 7. In the circumstances, it is all the more critical that the submissions made relating to the supplementary issues of inputs as well as return of surplus from the manufacturing process to store would need to be examined. From a perusal of the impugned order it is seen that the appellant either did not, or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
