Tribunal allows appeals due to lack of evidence, finding appellants' denial credible.

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed all appeals, finding that the appellants' consistent denial of excess stock, supported by the partner's statement and lack of evidence from the Revenue, was credible. The Commissioner's observation on the stock-taking method lacked factual basis, leading to the conclusion that excess stock was not conclusively established during the officers' visit.

---

---

Issues involved: Excess stock of copper rods found during physical verification, imposition of penalties on appellants, redemption fine in lieu of confiscation.

Excess Stock Issue: The officers found 3,505 kgs of excess copper rods during physical verification, leading to penalties imposed on the first appellant and the partners. The appellants claimed that the excess was due to accounting copper rods as copper bars in the RG-1 Register. The partner admitted to the shortage but explained that it was cleared illicitly. The appellants maintained consistency in their statements, denying the existence of excess stock.

Parties' Arguments: The appellants argued that the excess was a result of accounting copper rods as copper bars, which was supported by the partner's statement and the authorized signatory's lack of knowledge during the search. The Revenue contended that the excess stock was intended for illicit removal, based on the partner's admission of illicit removal of goods found short.

Judgment: The Tribunal considered the consistency in the appellants' statements and the lack of evidence from the Revenue to refute the claim of accounting copper rods as copper bars. The Commissioner's observation regarding the authorized signatory's agreement with the stock-taking method was found to be not based on facts. As no excess was conclusively found during the officers' visit, the impugned order was set aside, and all appeals were allowed.

---