2012 (9) TMI 568

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....   Per D.N. Panda:   Learned Counsel vehemently contest the appeal on the ground that when there was no clandestine removal proved penalty should not be imposed at all under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Neither duty is collectible nor any amount of penalty.   2. Above proposition is not acceptable to Revenue relying on first appellate order.   3. Heard bot....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tory resulted in shortage, onus of proof was discharged by investigation. Inventory was witnessed by the appellant himself for which taking shelter of any circumstantial evidence was unwarranted. Burden of proof was discharged by Revenue bringing home the appellant to the shortage found. Revenue did not make the appellant defenceless.   6. There were three stages of course of natural justi....