Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2022 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (4) TMI 771 - AT - Central ExciseLevy of penalty u/r 26 of CER - separate penalties on partnership firm and the partners of the firm - Clandestine removal - non-issuance of invoices - payments received in cash - HELD THAT:- Both the adjudicating authority has considered the entire records and evidences as is against the appellant and imposed the penalty. There is confessional statement of Appellant, the entire clandestine activity was also supported by the transactions recorded in records which were recovered from appellant. Further the Manufacturer, M/s Shree Ram Ispat also not disputed the demand of central excise duty involving the role of appellant in this matter. The penalty provisions were correctly invoked to impose penalty on him. There are no reason to set aside such a reasoned orders for the imposition of penalty. However, the appellant being an individual considering the overall facts of this case, the penalty imposed on the appellant is reduced to ₹ 50,000/-. Penalty on Partner - HELD THAT:- The Ld. Adjudicating authority in impugned order-in-appeal described the role of Appellant and had observed that the Appellant was engaged in clandestine removals of the goods as partner of M/s Shree Ram Ispat and facts of this case very clearly establish that he was the key person and was responsible for clandestine removal of the goods manufactured by M/s Shree Ram Ispat. He, as a partner, was looking after day-to-day affairs of M/s Shree Ram Ispat and had concerned himself in various irregular activities related to excisable goods including manufacture, storage, removal etc of such goods - the Adjudicating authority had given the detailed finding on the role of the partner. However, considering the overall facts of this case penalty imposed on the Appellant is reduced to ₹ 50,000/-. Appeal allowed in part.
|