TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (1) TMI 831
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hargeable to Central Excise duty under Chapter 87 of the Central Excise Tariff. They also avail the duty credit in respect of inputs as per the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules. For the manufacture of parts, they acquire rough forgings from M/s. Vijay Malleable Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Khosla Foundry Ltd. and they take cenvat credit of duty paid on the rough forgings. The Appellant firm's factory was visited by the jurisdictional Central Excise Officers on 10-1-2003 in the course of which their records were scrutinized and stock of the inputs and finished goods were checked. Certain records were also resumed. The officers took the stock of various inputs as on 1-4-2002 from the Appellant firm's balance sheet, and thereafter took into account the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tinely without payment of duty; and (b) imposition of penalty on the Appellant firm u/s 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and on Shri Amar Nath u/r 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. 1.2 The above SCN was adjudicated by the Assistant Commissioner vide Order-in-Original dated 27-14-2006 by which the duty demand along with interest was confirmed; penalty of equal amount i.e. Rs. 3,64,836/- was imposed on the Appellant firm u/s 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and penalty of Rs. 50,000/- was imposed on Shri Amar Nath u/r 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. 1.3 On appeal to Commissioner (Appeals), the duty demand was reduced to Rs. 204132/- as against the original demand of Rs. 3,64,836/- on the ground that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....only on the actual manufacturing activity and not on presumptions. (3) Department's allegation of unaccounted purchase of rough castings is without any basis, as no inquiry has been made in this regard with the suppliers. (4) In respect of allegation of clandestine removal of finished goods, no inquiry has been made with the buyers. There was no incentive for the Appellant to evade the duty as their buyers are OEMs, like Maruti, Escorts etc. who would not accept any goods without invoices. In case of Beck India Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2004 (173) E.L.T. 70 it has been held that mere shortage of goods is not evidence of clandestine removal. (5) Tribunal in cases of - (i) Kalvert F....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gings of various parts of motor vehicles/tractors and processes the same to manufacture tractor/MV parts. In some cases, they send the semi-finished goods out to job worker for certain process. Since the Appellant admittedly clear only the tractor parts/MV parts, not rough forgings, unexplaining shortage in the stock of rough forgings would imply clandestine clearance of finished MV/tractor parts. The point of dispute is as to whether the method adopted by the department for determining the stock of various items of rough forgings as on 10-1-2003 with reference to the stock of these rough forgings shown in the balance sheet as on 1-4-2002 is correct. According to the! Appellant the balance sheet figures are not reliable and that the physica....