TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 766
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (herein after referred to as the main appellant) was visited by the Central Excise Officers on 16.12.2010 and some loose sheets of balance sheets for the years 2007-08 and 2008-09 were recovered as also private records of the clandestinely removed goods were found. After recording statements of various persons, a show cause notice was issued to the main appellant as well as the individual directing them to show cause as to why the demand of duty be not calculated based upon the loose sheets of private records as found for the period 2006-07 to 16.12.2010 be not demanded and also duty demand for the period 2006-07 to 2008-09 based on the loose balance sheets be not demanded. The entire show cause notice proceeded on the basis of goods were ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e pages of balance sheet which were recovered during visit. She would submit that the appellant has accepted the fact that private sales register is indicting sales of clandestinely removed finished goods and to that extent she accepted the duty liability and interest thereof. As regards the demand based upon the balance sheet figure, she draws our attention to said balance sheet and submit that balance sheet though indicating higher sales for the year 2007-08 and 2008-09 they were for the purpose of getting better loans and to show to the creditor of the company they were in good financial position. She also draws our attention to the statement of the Director, one of the appellant before us wherein he was specifically asked as to explain ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ards the demand of the duty on clandestinely removed goods based upon the entries made in the private note book, it has been confirmed by the adjudicating authority based upon the statement of the Managing Director. 5. We have considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the record. 6. The first issue that needs to be addressed in these appeals is regarding confirmation of the demand of the duty, interest thereof and equivalent amount of penalty on the appellant for the goods clandestinely removed goods by recording the same in the private note book which was maintained by the responsible officer of the main appellant. It is undisputed that the said note book was recovered from the appellant's premises and the Director was co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing the finished goods which were found unrecorded and redemption fine imposed in lieu of confiscation is also appropriate. We find no reason to interfere with such reasonable order passed by the adjudicating authority on the confiscation of the unaccounted goods. 8. As regards the demand of duty confirmed , due to difference in balance sheet figure, we find that the appellant had filed balance sheet certified by the Chartered Accountant with the various Government authorities. The said audited balance sheet indicated sale figure which is less than the sales figure which was shown in the photocopies of the Trading and Profit and Loss Account for the year ending as on 31.3.2008 and 31.3.2009 which resumed during the visit of the officers. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....due difference between audited balance sheet filed with the authorities and the photocopies of the balance sheet recovered, there can be suspicion as the correct sales figure, at the same time there is absence of other corroborative evidence to show that sales figure recorded in the loose sheets recovered from the appellant premises are correct sales figures. We find that investigation was not carried furher as on specific query from the Bench as to whether the statement of C.A. who signed the balance sheet, whose signature appeared on the loose sheet of the balance sheet was recorded or otherwise, it was informed by the A.R. that there is nothing on record to indicate so. We also find that there is no exercise was undertaken to correlate f....