Corroboration over retracted statements: documented grey returns and proven shortages determine duty, limitation, interest and penalty exposure.

Retractions of officers' statements, without independent corroboration, could not sustain a demand where RT-12 returns and grey return challans supported the assessee, so the grey return entries were accepted as genuine. A shortage demand based on EB-4/RG-1 discrepancy was rejected where the department used an incorrect method and duplicated stock figures. Duty was, however, upheld on the limited remaining shortage in cotton fabrics, the balance shortage in man-made fabrics, and unproved godown bales treated as unaccounted clearances, with remand for quantification, confiscation-related consequences and allied reliefs. Extended limitation, interest from the operative date of Section 11AB, and penalties were also held applicable.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the demand based on discrepancy between EB-4/RG-1 records and physical stock could be sustained; (ii) whether the entries showing grey return in the RG-1 register were genuine; (iii) whether duty was payable on the remaining shortages in cotton and man-made fabrics, including goods found in the godown; and (iv) whether extended limitation, interest and penalties were attracted.

Issue (i): Whether the demand based on discrepancy between EB-4/RG-1 records and physical stock could be sustained

Analysis: The shortage alleged on the basis of EB-4 (Amended) was found to rest on an incorrect method, because the department relied upon bales not circled rather than verifying whether they were actually available in the factory or had already been cleared on duty. The demand was also found duplicative since the same stock figures were again used for alleged shortage vis-a -vis RG-1.

Conclusion: The demand on this count was not sustainable and the Commissioner's order dropping it was upheld.

Issue (ii): Whether the entries showing grey return in the RG-1 register were genuine

Analysis: The department relied mainly on retracted statements of officers, but no independent corroboration was produced. Documentary material such as RT-12 returns and grey return challans supported the assessee's case, and the authenticity of those challans was not effectively disproved by inquiry or contrary evidence.

Conclusion: The grey return entries were accepted as genuine and the demand on that basis was correctly dropped.

Issue (iii): Whether duty was payable on the remaining shortages in cotton and man-made fabrics, including goods found in the godown

Analysis: For cotton fabrics, after giving credit for genuine grey returns and fire losses, only a small balance shortage survived, warranting duty on that limited quantity. For man-made fabrics, allowance for grey returns and fire loss reduced the shortage, but the plea of shrinkage was not accepted and duty was held payable on the balance shortage, with remand for quantification. As to the godown goods, only part of the bales was supported by evidence; the remaining bales were treated as cleared without payment of duty, liable to confiscation, with remand for exact duty, redemption fine and related consequences.

Conclusion: Duty was sustained on the limited cotton shortage, the balance shortage in man-made fabrics, and on the unproved godown bales, and the matter was remanded for quantification and consequential orders.

Issue (iv): Whether extended limitation, interest and penalties were attracted

Analysis: Since the surviving demand was based on clandestine removal and incorrect statutory record-keeping, the extended period was held invocable. Interest was upheld from the date on which Section 11AB became operative, and penalties were held liable under the stated excise provisions.

Conclusion: Extended limitation, interest and penalties were upheld, subject to quantification by the Commissioner.

Final Conclusion: The revenue's appeal succeeded only in part: most of the dropped demand was upheld to a limited extent, while the remaining issues were left for fresh quantification and consequential action by the adjudicating authority.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the department's case rests on retracted statements, the demand must be supported by credible corroborative evidence, and documentary records and genuine challans will prevail over uncorroborated oral testimony; however, proven shortages and unaccounted removals remain exigible to duty, interest and penalty.

---