2018 (7) TMI 320

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....C.I.Ingot Mould and other articles of Iron Casting classifiable under Chapters 84,73 etc. of the first schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act (CETA), 1985. A Show Cause-cum-Demand Notice was served upon the appellant M/s. Ramgarh Casting and its partner Shri Pawanjay Kumar for alleged clandestine clearance of their manufactured finished excisable goods and proposing to demand duty along with interest and to impose penalty on the firm and its partner. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand alongwith interest and also imposed penalty of equal amount on the appellant firm and its partner. On appeal the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeals filed by the assessee and upheld the adjudication order. Hence, the present appeal. Appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng on behalf of the appellants argued the matter at length. He has also submitted written submission along with case laws. The main contention of the ld. Advocate is that the Central Excise Officers ascertained the duty liability on preponderance of possibilities, since except the records of the statement of the authorized signatories, there is no other evidence to substantiate the allegation of clandestine removal. Ld. Advocate vehemently argued that unless there is a clinching evidence in the nature of purchase of raw-materials, use of electricity, sale of final products, clandestine removals, the mode of flow back of funds, the demands cannot be confirmed solely on the basis of presumptions and assumptions. Since clandestine removal is a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by him. Appellants have relied upon various case laws on this issue. When on the date of stock taking itself appellant was reluctant to sign the stock taking made by the department and the authorized representatives then it cannot be said that the appellants extended any concessions to the department in stock taking in whatever manner they want. Stock was required to be verified on actual weighment basis as per relied upon case laws and not on the basis adopted by the department while calculating shortages in stock of the appellants. The demand of clandestine removal calculated on the basis of certain weighment slips and the statements recorded during the investigation. The statements of relied upon witnesses are the only evidences on recor....