Full Judgment
2. The learned authorized representative (DR) for the department submitted that there was no valid reason for the Commissioner (Appeals) to hold that the physical shortage of 17680.77 kgs. of granules was explained. He also submitted that the excess stock of 600 kgs. of HDPE granules was not explained and therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) has committed an error in setting-aside the order of the adjudicating authority.
3. The Commissioner (Appeals), on the basis of the material on record held that the allegation of short receipt could not have been based on the statement of the director alone. He found that there was a physical shortage of 4700 kgs. of HDPE granules out of which it was established that 4075 kgs. were issued for production, leaving a shortage of only 625 kgs. It appears that the Commissioner (Appeals) has worked out the shortage, on the basis of the material on record, at 625 kgs. only as against the alleged shortage of 17681 kgs. There is no valid ground pointed out for interfering with this finding of the Commissioner (Appeals). Even as regard the excess of 600 kgs. The Commissioner (Appeals) in paragraph 9 of the impugned order, given cogent reasons for holding that confiscation was not justified because there was no reason to suspect that this quantity, which was very meager as compared to the total quantity, was meant for clandestine removal even if it was found to be in excess.' 4. For the foregoing reasons there is no warrant to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.