ORDER
Moheb Ali M., Member (T)
1. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of newsprint classified under Chapter heading 48.01 and writing and printing paper classified under Chapter heading 48.02. The present dispute relates to clearances of consignments of newsprint. The contention of the department is that the appellants have cleared 41,499 kgs. of newsprint illicitly, evading payment of duty to the tune of Rs. 1,90,895/-. The allegation is based on the evidence that at the time of clearance, the consignments were weighed on the weight bridge situated in the factory which had shown a weight more than the one shown on the various gate passes under which the consignments were cleared. There is no dispute that these consignments on which weight difference occurred was also cleared to the newspaper publishers. The notification in this regard prescribes that it newsprint is cleared to newspaper publishers, they attract nil rate of duty. The contention that the newsprint in question is illicitly removed appears to be based on the fact that there is a weight difference between the weight shown on the weight bridge slip and the ones shown on the gate passes. The department does not bring out that differential quantity was supplied to anybody other than the newspaper publisher. The Commissioner’s contention that duty is leviable on the differential quantity because there is a weight difference cannot be sustained so long as the department is not in a position to establish that the differential quantity if at all has really gone to persons other than newspaper publishers. We, therefore, agree with the contention of the appellant that the quantity covered under these gate passes has also been supplied to the newspaper publishers only. In view of what has been discussed above, we find merit in the appellants contention.
2. The appeals are thus allowed. The order of the Commissioner is accordingly set aside.