TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (2) TMI 92
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....chnical Member Shri T.V. Sureshkumar, Advocate For the Appellant Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per D. N. Panda There are two allegations made in the SCN. The first allegation is that the quantity of 77,300 kgs. of stable bleaching powder found from the sole selling agent of the appellant was clandestinely removed by the appellant involving duty of Rs. 1,17,352/-. The ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t proving clandestine removal, department cannot make allegation of such removal for levy of duty of Rs. 3,52,809/-. 4. On the other hand Revenue s submission is that learned adjudicating authority has acted rightly under law. 5. When paras-15 & 16 of the adjudication order is looked into, it shows that learned adjudicating authority has made his finding not on the sole consideration of entry av....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... allegation in the SCN. It was our first impression that closing stock value of the waste appeared in Balance Sheet. But when Schedule-8 to the Financial Statement of the Financial Year 1998-99 was looked into, that exhibits that there was sale of 'waste bleaching powder'. Therefore that led to further examination as to whether it was the practice of the appellant to clear 'bleaching p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the same causing detriment to the interest of Revenue which resulted in demand of duty of Rs. 3,52,809/-. Accordingly, on this count also, adjudication is confirmed. 7. So far as penalty on the appellant M/s.Aries Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. is concerned, when it is noticed that appellant was instrumental to cause detriment to interest of Revenue there is no need for leniency to grant relief on penalty....