TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 1159
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0/-. The appellant crossed the said value of Rs. 10,00,000/- on 10.03.2001 and started paying duty. They were thus allowed for availing transitional credit of duty involved on the stock of inputs, inputs contained in semi-finished products and finished products held by them as on 10.03.2001. The appellant vide their letter dated 21.03.2001 filed declaration of stock of kraft paper, interalia held by them as on 07.03.2001. Thus, in the case of SL the appellant declared that they had a quantity of 9,08,555 kgs. of kraft paper which was eligible for credit of duty paid to the tune of Rs. 27,93,050/-. In the case of SP they declared stock of quantity of 6,51,668 kgs. of inputs and these were eligible for credit of duty paid to the tune of Rs. 19,97,848/-. Vide letter dated 10.04.2001, the department allowed the appellants to avail the credit as declared by them, subject to the condition that if the credit is found to be ineligible at any time, the same should be reversed. The factory premises of both units were searched on 17.02.2003 and documents were recovered. Statements of various persons were also recorded. The Department came to the conclusion that SL had only stock of 3,24,158 k....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... visited the premises and seized certain documents and recorded statements. The main document recovered by the department is the stock register maintained by the appellants. It is the case of the department that the appellant was maintaining two stock registers and that in the new stock register maintained by the appellant the figures are fictitious so as to suit the appellant to avail excess credit. He submitted that the period of such controversy pertains only for a short period in March, 2001 when the appellants started paying duty on the corrugated boxes when such goods became exigible to duty. On 10.03.2001, the appellant crossed the SSI exemption limit of Rs. 10,00,000/- and started paying duty. For this purpose, they had to file declaration giving the details of stock of inputs and the inputs contained in semi-finished goods and finished products. All the details have been correctly furnished by the appellants. 4.2 At the time of search, the department recovered two stock registers. The stock registers were maintained by the Stores In-charge of the appellant unit. In SL, Shri Palani was maintaining the Stock Register and after he left service in the Company, Shri Murali K....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lessor quantity of input/kraft paper in stock and that the appellant has availed excess credit is not sustainable. 4.3 In the case of SP, the Stock In-charge was looked after by Shri Thirugnanam. He has deposed that the stock statement prepared by him was correct. He stated that the opening stock of 6,51,668 kgs. shown as on 10.03.2001 was based on the stock statement on such date. That SP had declared the closing stock as on 31.03.2001 to be 6,78,500 kgs. This quantity was declared before Income Tax and the Sales Tax Department. By reconciling the purchases made and the issues for production between 10.03.2001 and 30.03.2001, and by calculating backwards, the appellant arrived at the stock of 6,51,668 kgs which exactly match with the stock held by them as on 10.03.2001, on which the appellants availed the credit. It is also argued by the Ld. Counsel that only if the holding stock of 6,78,500 kgs is considered to be the stock as on 31.03.2001, can the production declared by them for the year 2001-02 be possible. 4.4 Ld. Counsel for the appellants has also argued on the ground of limitation. He submitted that the appellants have not suppressed any facts. On 10.03.2001 when the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....statements recorded. Shri Murali Kumar who was maintaining the stores in charge in the case of SL has deposed that he had joined the Company in July, 2001 and prior to that one person by name Shri Palani was in charge of stores. That, Shri Muralikumar continued to make entries in the old stock book indicated as II/2 till 24.03.2002. Thereafter, the new stock book II/1 was started as guided by Shri Kavithasan, DGM (Commercial) of the Company. That, the stock of inputs entered in the new book was based on the stock statement as on 7.3.2001 given to him. This would go to show that the appellant was maintaining a new stock book so as to suit the Cenvat credit declared by them on 21.3.2001. In the case of SP, the stock register was maintained by Shri Thirugnanam and he has stated that the declaration of input stock has been made on the basis of stock statement dated 07.03.2001. In the reconciliation statement submitted before the Tribunal by the appellant, there is difference in figures under Schedule-J of the Balance Sheet for the year ending 31.03.2002. As notes to the schedule-J of the Balance Sheet, the appellant has stated that the exact quantity of sales is unascertainable since s....