Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the demand of central excise duty on shortages detected during factory stock verification, along with the reduced penalties, was liable to be interfered with.
Analysis: The stock verification was conducted on the basis of a detailed panchnama and weighment, with the appellant's authorised representative participating in the exercise and signing the verification report. The shortage of finished goods and inputs was not satisfactorily explained. The subsequent voluntary debit of duty on the detected shortages and the absence of any credible objection to the method of verification supported the finding that the shortage was real. The contention that the shortages were insignificant as a percentage of total stock did not displace the finding that identifiable excisable goods were found short. The Tribunal also noted that the authorities relied upon by the appellant were factually distinguishable, while the principle emerging from the Revenue's cited authority was that, where shortage of finished goods remains unexplained, the method of clandestine removal need not be separately proved.
Conclusion: The demand of duty and the reduced penalties were upheld, and no interference was called for.