Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (9) TMI 55 - AT - Central ExciseNon - Accountal of Goods - Allegation of non-accountal of 49.960 kgs. of branded chewing tobacco under the provisions of Section 9(2) & 173Q of the Central Excise Rules was concerned - there was no dispute that this much quantity of finished chewing tobacco had not been accounted for in the RG-12 Register and even at the time of personal hearing - the allegation had not been refuted, the Commissioner (Appeals)’s order with regard to confiscation of 49.960 kgs. of branded chewing tobacco was upheld. Clandestine Removal - Duty Demand - Interest u/s 11AB - Penalty u/s 11AC - Held that:- The findings of the lower appellate authority were uphled that entries in the bill book, Register titled “rent receipt register” and loose sheets pertained to the removal of finished goods without payment of duty and hence the duty demand based on the same has been correctly upheld - Since this was a case of clandestine removal, penalty under Section 11AC and interest on duty under Section 11AB would be attracted. Standard of Proof - Held that:- The evidence on record in the case was sufficient to establish the preponderance of probabilities - Keeping in view the principles regarding the standard of evidence required for proving the allegation of duty evasion in the departmental adjudication proceedings - The standard of proof required in the Departmental proceedings under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 or Central Excise Act, 1944 or of the Rules made thereunder, for confiscation of goods, confirmation of demand for duty evaded, and imposition of penalty was the preponderance of probability - For establishing to be preponderance of probability, the adjudicating authority or the Tribunal had to evaluate the evidence of both the sides and decide what was most probable - Decided against assessee.
|