TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 179X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ord. In respect of the goods found short in the factory, the contention is that no objection was raised, now the appellant cannot challenge the correctness of that. The Revenue relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of MAJESTIC AUTO LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, GHAZIABAD [ 2004 (7) TMI 136 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] . In this case, the demand was raised on the basis of certain loose slips recovered from Shri D.K. Rana who is not the employee of the appellant and is working under the labour contractor. From the statement as on record, it is clear that it is not signed by any Central Excise Officer. This fact is also clear from the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate whereby the proceedings were dropped. It is found ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d from Shri D.K. Rana. Shri D.K. Rana was an employee of the contractor who supplied labour to the appellant-firm and these loose papers shown the production from 1-11-91 to 30-11-91. According to these loose papers, the production of ingots is much higher than reflected in the RG-1 record. Physical verification was also conducted in respect of the final production found in the factory and it was found that there was shortage of final product. Show cause notice was issued asking for duty in respect of the final product found in short and in respect of the ingots as per slips recovered from Shri D.K. Rana which were not reflected in the RG-1 record. The adjudicating authority dropped the demand on the ground that the demand was raised on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6 and in these proceedings also it was held that statements were not signed by excise officer. 6. In respect of the goods found short in the factory the contention is that these shortages was arrived at only estimate basis. The appellant relied upon Panchnama prepared at the time of verification which says the goods were never weighed and only the average weight was taken. The contention is that the demand cannot be made which is arrived at on the basis of average. 7. The contention of the Revenue is that Shri D.K. Rana never retracted in his statement. As per his statement, he admitted that the recovery of the slip which petains to the production of the ingots during the period 1-11-91 to 30-11-91. The contention is also that Shri Mahendra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dentity of Central Excise Officer who recorded such statements cannot be sustained. In the present case, signature of the Central Excise Officer who recorded statement is not there. In view of the above decision of the Tribunal, such statements cannot be relied upon for confirming the demand. The loose slips which were recorded from Shri D.K. Rana were not signed by anybody the signatures were obtained by the Revenue on 5-12-91 at the time of recovery, therefore, the finding of the Commissioner in the impugned order that slips were signed by Rana is also not sustainable. 8. In respect of the goods found short in the factory on the Panchnama, it is clear that the shortage was recorded on the average basis. The Revenue relied upon the decisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
