SARGODHA ENTERPRISES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the impugned order -in -appeal vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has affirmed the order -in -original regarding confirmation of duty, confiscation of the goods and imposition of the penalty on the appellants.

(2.) The learned Counsel has contended that no proper verification of the raw material lying in the factory of the appellants was carried out by the Central Excise officers. They only examined the raw material lying in the factory and did not verify about the material which was in the process of manufacture. He has also contended that in a case of alleged shortage of the raw material, no duty could be confirmed in the absence of any allegations regarding the clandestine removal of the raw material as such or of the finished goods produced from that raw material.

(3.) On the other hand, the learned JDR has reiterated the correctness of the impugned order. He has argued that since Modvat credit was availed by the appellants on the raw material found short, duty had been rightly confirmed by the adjudicating authority.