TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (8) TMI 590
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pra, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This appeal arose out of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), who in the impugned order confirmed the order of the lower authority. 2. Briefly the facts are that the appellant is a manufacturer of Aromatic Chemicals falling under Chapters 29 and 33 of CETA, 1985. The Central Excise officers conducted stock challenge of the raw material and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. 99,279/- towards duty on the shortages found should not be demanded. The lower original authority confirmed this duty and imposed penalty of Rs. 20,000/- the Commissioner (A) confirmed this order. 3. Heard both sides. Ld. Advocate argued that no proper panchnama was drawn nor weighment of the goods in question had been done while drawing the panchnama and therefore they desired to cross....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ss-examined, and the physical stock should be properly verified and merely because no objection was raised by the management is not sufficient to presume clandestine removal. In the case of Malwa Cotton Spinning Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise [2003 (155) E.L.T. 161] the Tribunal held that duty cannot be demanded for shortages in stock unless proper weighment is done. He also relied o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hen stock challenges are done. In the present case the stock challenges seemed to have done in the presence of panchas witnesses. This is at best an extra precaution and not a legal requirement. In any case the stock challenge is done in the presence of the authorised representative of the assessee namely the Manager who certified that the figure shown in the annexure to the panchnama are correct.....