Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2013 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (10) TMI 406 - HC - Central ExciseClandestine Production and Removal of Cigarettes – selling the goods without issue of invoices. - Omission and Commission under Rule 26 of CE Rules - Held that:- Capt.Raj Kumar Gupta and Shri Vidyut Raj were actively involved in the functioning of M/s Musk Tobacco - They indulged in clandestine production and clearance and abetted M/s Musk Tobacco in evasion of the Central Excise duty on the cigarettes - Capt. Raj Kumar Gupta and Shri Vidyut Raj were in full knowledge of the fact that the Cigarettes removed by Musk Tobacco clandestinely were liable to confiscation under Central Excise Law - Capt. Raj Kumar Gupta and Shri Vidyut Raj are liable to penal action, for their acts of omission and commission under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The role of Shri Raghu / Shri Raghuvar Dayal, who never appeared to explain the contents of the documents recovered from his residence inspite of repeated summons - He deliberately avoided his presence from the officers as several important documents relating to Capt. R.K.Gupta and M/s Musk Tobacco were found in his residence - they had full knowledge that the Cigarettes removed by Must Tobacco clandestinely were non-duty paid which were liable to confiscation under Central Excise law - Shri Shankar Pal Pradhan and Shri Raghu Raghuvar Dayal are liable to penal action for their acts of omission and commission under Rule 26 of the Central Excise, 2002. Waiver of Pre-deposit – Relying upon Benara Valves Ltd. & Or. v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Anr. [2006 (11) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ] - Tribunal has not committed any error of law in directing the appellants to deposit ₹ 1 crore for stay of remaining amount of excise duty and penalties - The Tribunal has directed the appellants to deposit a lumpsum amount of ₹ 1 crore giving benefit for excise duty and penalty as also various amounts of penalties imposed on the appellants - it was found that all the appellants had acted with common design and purpose to evade excise duty by clandestinely removing excisable goods, the demand on lumpsum basis does not suffer from any arbitrariness - The Tribunal has given substantial relief based on the financial position of the appellants - there was not any ground to interfere with the common order passed by the Tribunal - Decided partly in favour of Assessee.
|