Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 722 - AT - Central ExciseImposition of penalty u/r 26 of the CER, 2002 - goods cleared clandestinely in the names of others - It is on record that goods cleared without payment of duty by Shri Ashok Jain in the name of all the three firms- M/s Cosmo, M/s Riemer and M/s Max have been sold through M/s BDFH and DD Brothers - Held that: - Documents evidencing such sales recovered from the premises of M/s BDFH establish that Shri Darshan Lal through both M/s BDFH as well as DD brothers have abetted Shri Ashok Jain in these clandestine clearances and hence will be liable for penalty under Rule 26. For the above reasons, I find that the penalty imposed on BDFH by the adjudicating authority is fully justified and merits no interference. Penalty on Jainico traders, Proprietor Shri Sanjay Jain - Held that: - Shri Sanjay Jain, Partner has admitted that they were purchasing goods from Shri Ashok Jain both with bills and without bills every month. Further, goods were seized from their premises which were cleared without payment of duty. In view of the above, the penalty imposed under Rule 26 is fully justified and merits no interference. Penalty on Shri Parvesh Jain, who was the Proprietor of M/s Max - Held that: - The investigation has established that during the relevant period, goods worth nearly ₹ 5.5 crores attracting duty of ₹ 91 lakhs have been found to have been cleared to M/s BDFH without payment of duty from M/s Max. Shri Parvesh Jain also in his statement has admitted that he has managed the sales without invoices. Consequently, penalty is liable to be imposed on Shri Jain under Rule 26. Even though Shri Parvesh Jain has claimed that he was only a paid employee of Shri Ashok Jain, it is on record that he has been instrumental in getting goods manufactured in the premises of M/s Max and clearance of the same without payment of duty - Shri Parvesh Jain, Proprietor of the M/s Max will be liable for levy of penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules. Penalties upheld - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|