TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (1) TMI 168
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., for the Appellant. Shri R.K. Mishra, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER Both the appeals are being disposed of by a common order, as they arise out of the same impugned orders of the authorities below confirming demand of duty of Rs. 18,37,145/- against M/s. Rhoda Textiles Pvt. Ltd. along with imposition of penalty of identical amount. In addition, penalty of Rs. 50,000/- stands imposed upon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....actually been cleared by the appellant, as such, without payment of duty, in the domestic market. Accordingly, proceedings were initiated against them proposing confirmation of demand for the past 5 years, which proceedings culminated into an order passed by the original adjudicating authority and upheld by Commissioner (Appeals). Hence, the present appeal. 4. After hearing both the sid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on, disclosing the higher percentage wastage. 5. For better appreciation, I also reproduce the relevant paragraph from Commissioner (Appeals)'s order :- "7. I also find that, there is a difference in figures of wastage shown in ARE-2 and form IV register, the Adjudicating Authority has held that, "differential wastage i.e. 609518 Sq. Mtrs. of fabrics were actually cleared at input ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....removal are sustainable". 6. As is clear from above, the appellate authority is only going by the differential wastage and by considering the same as sufficient evidence for clandestine removal, is rejecting the appeal. Tribunal in the case of Klene Paks Ltd. v. CCE, Bangalore-I reported in 2009 (247) E.L.T. 271 (Tri.-Bang.) has held that confirmation of demand on the allegation of clandes....