2018 (10) TMI 318

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he case and in law, the Tribunal erred in not considering the clear language of proviso to Section 11A of the Act, 1944, stipulates that when any duty of excise has not been levied or paid or has been short-levied or short-paid by reason of fraud, collusion or willful misstatement or suppression of fact, the Central Excise officer may, within five years, from the relevant date, serve notice on the person requiring him to show cause why he should not pay the amounts specified in the notice when there is no allegation of any clandestine removal or any such attempt, on the Appellants?   (b) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has erred in not considering that penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise A....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt of 200.278 MT of inputs which were not received by the Appellant. (d) The Appellant resisted the show cause notice. However, by order dated 30th September, 2011, the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise confirmed the show cause notice. Thus, negativing the Appellant's contention that the demand is unsustainable as no physical stocktaking was done, as an after thought. (e) On further appeal, both the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) and the Tribunal found on facts, that there was a shortage found and accepted at the time of stocktaking. It held that the defence on the part of the Appellant is an after thought. This by recording the fact that at the time when the shortage was found, the panchanama was drawn and statements w....