Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (11) TMI 628 - CESTAT CHENNAICalndestine removal of goods – Bundles of Safety matches seized – Appellant transported the goods without any sort of accounting – Documents produced does not prove bonafide of the assessee – Held that:- The defense being raised is based on the register which was not available at during investigation which leads to the inevitable conclusion that the these are created just for defending the case - The documents cannot be accepted as a bonafide records based on which relief can be granted - the seized bundles can be considered only as part of goods produced by Suriyan Match Works which were yet to be accounted on the date of seizure - thus on this quantity duty cannot be demanded or a second time by including it in the quantity of goods to be received back - the duty demanded on unaccounted clearances reduced – Redemption fine reduced because fine should be related to duty sought to be evaded rather than the value of goods. Penalty u/s 11AC r.w. Rule 25of central excise rules – Held that:- Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules is subject to provisions of section 11AC of Central Excise Act - This is to be understood to mean that where section 11AC is applicable provisions of section 11AC will apply and not provisions of Rule 25 - This is a case of clandestine removal which is held to be proved – Thus penalty under section 11AC is sustainable - the amount demanded has already been appropriated from the Security Deposit made - it is proper that the penalty is reduced to 25% of the differential duty involved – Decided partially in favour of Assessee.
|