2004 (12) TMI 448

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....weight of ingots and girders and the entire quantity was not physically weighed. He also referred to the statement dated 12-9-2001 of Shri S.C. Jain, Authorised Signatory of the appellant wherein reply to question No. 9, he stated "that the raw material MS ingots available in our factory were made separate lots according to the sizes and each lot 5 ingots were weighed and one ingot weight worked out multiplied by number of ingots. In the same way MS girders were also made lots according to the size and each one girder was weighed multiplied by numbers and weight of lot was arrived and end cuttings were weight for physical verification. We are fully satisfied from it". He, therefore, pleaded that in view of this, the weight of the ingots wer....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... same variety were first separated and after determining the average weight of each variety, the total weight was arrived at. Panchnama has not been disputed by the appellants. Therefore, there is no mistake in arriving at the shortage. The subsequent letter sent by the appellants on 13-9-2001 cannot be the basis for redoing the verification as after the complete verification of the stock and agreement of the appellants with it, subsequent challenge of the same is only an after thought. Reverification cannot be done after giving time to the appellant to make changes in the stock. He, therefore pleaded that the panchnama is the basic document and that has been drawn in the presence of two independent witnesses and that has been accepted by t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....heir signature on the panchnama drawn on the spot in token of their having satisfied with the entire proceedings covered thereunder. As per the panchnama, the proceedings began at 11.00 hrs/12-9-2001 and concluded at 23.30 hrs/12-9-2001, which suggests that reasonable time was consumed in the stock taking with full agreement of the appellant's authorised signatory who at no stage questioned the method adopted by the officers. Moreover, the panchnama also testifies that Shri Jain could not give any convincing explanation for the difference in stock of finished goods/raw material. His dated signatures in agreement with the contents of the panchnama and stating therein that he was completely satisfied with the manner of checking and his reply ....