TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 428
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on whom equal penalty was imposed but the penalty was reduced to Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) by the Commissioner (Appeals). Since both the appeals arising out of the same impugned order, therefore both the appeals are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that during the audit on the records of the appellant, departmental officers noticed some shortcomings and irregular practices followed by the appellant. Hence, the issues have been verified and investigated by the preventive unit of the Commissionerate. On investigation it is found that closing stock of the materials in stock register is not available for physical verification; that the appellant has availed simultaneous ben....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....id order, appellant filed these two appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals), Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal of both the parties but reduced the penalty on the Accounts Officer from Rs. 6,53,007/- to Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only). Hence the present appeals. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without considering the peculiar facts of the case and the documents on record. He further submitted that the wrecked ship was in sea and warehousing bill of entry was filed on estimated quantity by paying Customs duty and when it was converted into scrap then the Central Excise....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urns regularly and according to the appellant only the stock in May 2009 was 227.86 MT and without any valid reasons and without any explanation, the opening balance in June was taken as zero. If the salvage quantity was less and when the appellants were clearing these scrap from time to time it is difficult to understand how appellants came with the closing balance of 227.86 MT instead of showing it as zero in May. He also submits that appellants were aware that the ship was submerged in the sea for three years and they will be aware of the consequences of ship being submerged in the sea for three years. Further I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the appellants have not produced a copy of the final assessment which wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and evidence on record and has passed a reasoned order. I also find that appellant has failed to produce the closing stock for physical verification. I am not convinced by the explanation given by the appellant for short recovery of scrap. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order upholding the Order-in-Original by the Commissioner (Appeals). Now coming to the imposition of penalty on the Accounts Officer of the assessee, the Commissioner (Appeals) has reduced the penalty to Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only). Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the only reason given by the Commissioner (Appeals) for imposing the penalty on the Accounts Officer Shri Rajesh Mehta is that he was involved in the day-to-da....