TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 1443
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion on 29.09.2014. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is a manufacture of SS pipes and tubes availing CENVAT credit on inputs and input services used in manufacture of their final product and paid duty on their final goods cleared by them. On 20.09.2014, a physical verification was conducted and during the course of physical verification it was alleged that there was a shortage of 58MT as compared to stock counted in their book of accounts. On the basis of that shortage, a show cause notice dated 28.05.2019 was issued to the appellant to recover the CENVAT credit of Rs. 19,35,576/-. The show cause notice was adjudicated and demand of Rs. 19,35,576/- was confirmed along with interest and penalties under section 11AC of the C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... estimation basis. Therefore, as stock verification was not done in a proper manner, the CENVAT credit cannot be denied. He also drew the attention to the annexure B to panchnama to show that there is no detail of stock verification being done physically was recorded in the panchnama. Therefore, the panchnama drawn during the course of investigation is not acceptable. He further submitted that no statement was recorded during the course of investigation. To support this contention, he relied on the decisions of this Tribunal in Mahendra Steel Industries vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. & S.T., Jaipur-I [2016(339) E.L.T.623(TRI.DEL.)] and Unique International Ltd. vs. Commissioner of C.Ex., Chandigarh [2016(344)E.L.T.555(TRI.-CHAN.)]. He further s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 7. On going through the said stock verification report it is clear that physical stock has not been done. It is done only on eye estimation basis, and same has been recorded by learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order which is reported as under: "a Panchnama was drawn on spot, stock of the pipe and tubes of various sizes were undertaken as per their item wise approx. weight and separately shown in Annexure 'B' of the panchnama." 8. Admittedly no such bifurcation of each item has been done in the panchnama, thereof, it is concluded that the stock documenting was done only on eye estimation basis and stock taking done on eye estimation basis cannot be the reason to allege clandestine removal of goods by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eals) held that the admitted fact need not be proved again. It is not clear as to what type of fact has been admitted. Even if Shri Gupta, partner of the appellant firm, has accepted the manner of stock taking and admitted the shortage of 45 MTS, in view of non-availability of very basis of stock taking and physical impossibility of going through the process of weighment of about 250 MTs of M.S. Bars within 2 hours and also arriving at the physical stock upto Kg. level without explaining how measurement was made creates serious lacunae and seriously affected the very basis of revenue's allegation. The Tribunal in Raj Ratan Industries Ltd. - 2013 (292) E.L.T. 123 (Tri.-Del.) held that the allegation of clandestine removal in such type of....