Just a moment...

Report
ReportReport
Welcome to TaxTMI

We're migrating from taxmanagementindia.com to taxtmi.com and wish to make this transition convenient for you. We welcome your feedback and suggestions. Please report any errors you encounter so we can address them promptly.

Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Report an Error
Type of Error :
Please tell us about the error :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home /

1993 (1) TMI 181

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....against the order-in-appeal No. AMP-773/PN-353/87, dated 8-6-1988. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturers of sodium bi-chromate. It was noticed by the officers that though the daily pro- duction report for the date 7-9-1981 was showing 22 M.Ts., as per the entries in the RG 1 register, only 10 MTs. was accounted for and hence it was alleged that 12 M.Ts. have not ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... bar pleaded by the appellants, he contended that the scrutiny of the private records was conducted only during 1983 by the audit and they were not revealed to the Department earlier. Hence, there is sup- pression of production to the extent 12 M.Tons. and hence demand is justified. 4. On a persual of the appeal memorandum and their written submission, the appellants have mainly pleaded on t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... plea made in their appeal and also taking into account the arguments advanced by Shri Tandon, I find that the factory records were audited in 1983, according to which the officers seem to have noticed the discrepancy long back. All the same the demand has been made only in the year 1985 and strangely no penalty has been imposed. If it is a case of clandestine removal of this much of quantity, pen....