TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Overturns Duty Demand Decision</h1> <h3>Aar Kay Industries Versus Commissioner of C. Ex., Chandigarh-I</h3> Aar Kay Industries Versus Commissioner of C. Ex., Chandigarh-I - 2016 (344) E.L.T. 1104 (Tri. - Chan.) Issues:Appeal against duty demand, interest, and penalty imposition based on stock shortage during investigation.Analysis:The appellant contested the demand of duty, arguing that payment made during investigation should suffice, as per Section 11A(5)(6). The stock taking method was questioned, claiming no shortage existed. The appellant relied on a previous decision. The Revenue stood by the impugned order.Upon review, the Tribunal found the stock taking method questionable due to significant variations. The shortage was minimal, and no evidence of clandestine removal was presented. The Tribunal highlighted Section 11A(5)(6)(7) provisions, emphasizing that paying duty, interest, and 25% penalty should conclude the matter without a show cause notice. As the Revenue lacked evidence, the allegation of clandestine removal was deemed unsustainable.The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, noting the appellant's compliance with payment requirements. The appeal was allowed with consequential relief.
TaxTMI 