Dismissal of Excise Act appeal due to lack of intent, no penalty imposed. Court fee deficiency and delay not addressed.

The appeal under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act was dismissed as the Tribunal found no intention to evade Excise duty and no penalty could be imposed. Consequently, the application under Section 149 C.P.C. for deficiency of Court fee and the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay were not addressed due to the dismissal of the appeal on its merits.

---

---

Issues involved: Appeal u/s 35-G of the Central Excise Act challenging order of the Tribunal; Application under Section 149 C.P.C. for deficiency of Court fee; Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay.

Appeal u/s 35-G of the Central Excise Act:
The Tribunal found no intention to evade Excise duty as shortage was explained during stock verification. Director's lack of involvement in day-to-day affairs was cited as reason for inability to explain shortage. No material supported clandestine removal of inputs. Citing precedents, it was concluded that no penalty u/s 11AC of the Act could be imposed due to substantive findings against the appellant. Appeal dismissed on merit.

Application under Section 149 C.P.C.:
As the appeal was dismissed on merit, no order was deemed necessary for the application filed under Section 149 C.P.C. for deficiency of Court fee.

Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act:
Given the dismissal of the appeal on merit, no action was deemed necessary on the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

---