Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2012 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (7) TMI 711 - CESTAT, MUMBAI100% EOU clandestine removal - assessee is alleged to have manufactured and cleared fabrics in DTA without payment of duty under the guise of sale of design software Held that:- Purchaser on whose name the bills of design software were raised under their letters and statements have confirmed that they have not purchased any design software from the assessee Company but they have purchased the articles of fabrics from the assessee - in the balance sheet of annual report, production of 1,16,010 Mtrs have been mentioned while in the central excise records it is recorded as 99,066 Mtrs only which shows that production in the excise records were suppressed with intention to evade payment of duty - appellants have clandestinely manufactured and cleared the goods under the guise of design software. Demand of duty - Job work alleged that assessee has sent the fabrics to the sub-contractor for job-work for getting processed the fabrics and the goods were never received back from the jobworkers Held that:- Assessee has issued sale bills of fabrics for consideration of amount and they have booked these transactions in their annual books of accounts - goods were cleared and bills were raised for the fabrics for consideration and it was nothing but sale and, therefore, duty is required to be paid by the appellants on such sales Limitation - Held that:- Appellants have not given the correct figure of production of goods in the central excise records as figures shown in balance sheets are different, therefore, extended period of limitation has rightly been invoked by the department . Duty - duty demanded under the show-cause notice dated 14.3.2002 has again been demanded in the present show-cause notice - at the rate prescribed under Notification No. 2/1995 which is applicable in respect of goods manufactured out of imported raw material as well as indigenous raw material - contention of the appellants that they have never imported any yarn for the manufacture of fabrics in their factory - matter remanded back to the original authority for adjudication after verification of these facts
|