TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 1649
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Respondent. ORDER The Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the demand against the respondents have been dropped by the learned Commissioner (Appeals), holding that the excess stock found at the time of physical verification is on the basis of estimation and Revenue has failed to produce any corroborative evidence for alleging that the respondents have removed the goods cla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....andestinely. Aggrieved from the said order, Revenue is before me. 3. Learned AR submits that in this case, the excess stock found in the factory of the appellant has not been explained by the respondents and the said goods were not recorded in the statutory records. Therefore, these goods were unaccounted goods which were said to be cleared clandestinely. He further submits that the weighmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l of goods clandestinely, therefore, impugned order is to be upheld. 5. Heard the parties. 6. Sole ground taken by the Revenue to file the appeal is that weighment done at the time of investigation is correct but the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has considered the production of whole of the manufacture to determine the goods produced on 18-12-2010 and 19-12-2010 whereas at the time o....