2004 (7) TMI 136

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....with interest on the short found goods (Two Wheelers as detailed therein). 2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of two wheelers (Scooters and Mopeds). On carrying out physical verification of their finished goods, 276 pieces of different models of two wheelers were found in excess as compared to stock entered in the RG-I register and 365 nos. of two-wheelers involving duty of Rs. 6,23,391/- and Cess of Rs. 4,870/- were found short. The statement of Shri Bhawnesh Vij, General Manager was recorded at the spot but he could not give any plausible explanation for these discrepancies in the stock. He however, got time to explain the shortage and excess of the stock by 21-1-2001. The excess found two wheelers were seized. On completio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion of Panchnama, in the presence of their authorized representative, Shri Ashwani and independent witnesses. Even Shri Bhawnesh Vij, General Manager of the appellants-company could not offer any explanation at that time for the excess and shortages of the goods. He only sought time till 21-1-2001 for explaining the position. But on that date, he did not submit any explanation. It is only on 14-3-2001, the appellants sent a letter along with their alleged computer print-out to explain the excess and shortage. But the same had been rightly not accepted by the authorities below as it could easily be prepared later on to create evidence, and in order to avoid penal action. It was sent only on 14-3-2001 after expiry of the period of 2 months fr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lants. Similarly, the confiscation of the un-accounted vehicles had also been rightly ordered and redemption fine for getting those redeemed had also been correctly imposed. The ratio of the law laid down in the following cases referred by the Counsel is not attracted to the facts of the present case :- (i) Indra Metal Works v. CCE, Pune [1999 (108) E.L.T. 745 (Tribunal)] (ii) CCE, Patna v. Universal Polythelene Industries [2001 (130) E.L.T. 228 (Tri. - Kolkata)] (iii) Nav Bharat Paper P. Ltd. v. CCE, Ghaziabad [2004 (165) E.L.T. 564 (Tri. - Delhi)] (iv) Emmtex Synthetics Ltd. v. CCE, New Delhi [2003 (151) E.L.T. 170 (Tri. - Delhi)] In those cases, the goods were found lying in the factory but were not entered in the RG-I register ....