Differential weight demand fails where consignment notes include packing materials and gift articles acknowledged by dealers.

Differential-duty demand based on higher weights in transport consignment notes than in invoices was unsustainable where the consignment notes included packing materials and gift articles supplied to dealers. The appellate authority accepted evidence that dealers acknowledged receipt of the gift articles and that the transporter's notes reflected the weight of gunny bags, corrugated boxes and similar packing materials. On that factual basis, the Tribunal found no infirmity in the order setting aside the demand and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand based on the difference between the weight shown in the invoice and the weight reflected in the consignment note was sustainable.

Analysis: The consignment notes were found to include the weight of packing materials and gift articles supplied to dealers or customers. The record also showed acceptance that the consignment contained such gift articles, and the transporters prepared the consignment notes. On these facts, the inference drawn by the appellate authority against the demand was not shown to be infirm.

Conclusion: The demand on the differential weight was held to be unsustainable, and the appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: A demand based only on a higher consignment-note weight cannot be sustained where the excess weight is explained by packing materials and gift articles included in the shipment and the factual finding accepting that explanation remains unshaken.

---