Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 1265 - AT - Central ExciseClandestine manufacture and removal of goods - Imposition of penalty - Section 35F - Held that:- Appellant had purchased the Dyed Fabrics from the said Company on the basis of challans and bills. It is also seen from the records that the statements of the traders were recorded. In this context, we refer the statement dt.12.03.2003 of Shri Ajay H. Shah, Authorised Signatory of M/s Hemen Textile, where he stated that they were engaged in the manufacturing of Grey Fabrics and they purchased Polyester Died Yarn/Textured Yarn/Twisted Yarn for manufacture of Grey Fabrics from the said Company. He confirmed that they have received the goods only under the cover of delivery challans and Bills. He produced the Xerox copies of delivery challans and bills to the investigating officer. It is noted that all statements are mostly similar in nature. - there is no material available on record that the Appellants had knowledge of the non-duty paid character of the goods. It is seen from the records that the Appellant as per the normal trade practice, purchased the goods with bills and challans from the said company. In view of that, we find that the imposition of penalty under Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules, 1944 on the Appellants/Traders cannot be sustained. It is seen that the Appellant in his statements dt.08.06.2001 and 29.03.2003 had categorically admitted that they were preparing parallel invoices on computer and quantity of goods mentioned therein were sold without payment of duty, without accounting of the same in their Central Excise statutory records. He also admitted that he had knowingly indulged himself in illicit clearance and removal of Dyed Polyester Yarn without payment of duty, without issuing Central Excise invoice and without accounting for in statutory records. We find that the Appellant was directly involved in the clandestine removal of the goods. It is also noted that that the Appellant Company had not complied with the stay order passed by this Tribunal. Hence, the imposition of penalty on Shri Ketan M. Shah is justified. - Decided partly in favour of assessee.
|