TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 951
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rbide & Chemicals Ltd. (Unit I and II) are engaged in the manufacture of Ferro Alloys such as Silico Manganese chips, liable to Central Excise duty. Central Excise officers, Raipur conducted certain investigation in January 2003, with reference to unaccounted clearance of excisable goods by these two respondents. The case started with detention of a lorry carrying 18 M.T. of Silico Manganese on 23/01/2003. Thereafter follow up investigations were carried out and proceedings were initiated against these two respondents to demand and recover Central Excise duty of Rs. 2,99,954/- and Rs. 30,71,427/- towards unaccounted clearance of excisable goods during the period 17/10/2002 to 23/01/2003. Notice was also issued to other three respondents for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ck carrying 18 M.T. of Silico manganese on 23/01/203 by the officers ; (b) the register maintained by the security staff of the main respondents in the factory gate and ; (c) evidences collected from weigh bridge. 4. He submitted that regarding seizure of final products during transit, the case was separately adjudicated and the Deputy Commissioner vide his order dated 31/05/2006 categorically held that there is no allegation at all, regarding non-duty paid nature of the seized goods. After due examination he dropped the proposal to confiscate the goods. Regarding the register maintained by the security staff, he submitted that the nature of goods referred to and the author of such entries were never cross verified, to take this regist....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....clandestine removal. This aspect has been examined in the impugned order, in detail, and the Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the allegations in the present proceedings are virtually the same as in the first proceedings which resulted in the said order of the Deputy Commissioner. 6. On the second set of evidence regarding register maintained by the security staff, a perusal of the appeal records clearly indicate that the nature of product indicated in the entries and the author of the entries was not identified, during the investigation. The source of the register and the contents were not vouched. Further, as observed in the impugned order, a further collaboration of this unauthenticated entries is certainly required. The same is not ....