Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 1348 - AT - Central ExciseLiability of Excise Duty - vintage case - case of appellant is that the adjudicating authority has not considered their plea for reduction in the duty liability on account of some quantities of the LAB having been used for manufacture of cleaning powder without the aid of power, which is exempted from central excise duty - Held that:- The evidence relied upon by the appellants, which was produced to the adjudicating authority in respect of the impugned adjudication proceedings, were beyond the period of demand. This dispute is of 1992 vintage and in the last 25 years that have passed by, the matter has come up to the Tribunal on three earlier occasions which has resulted in the proceedings having been adjudicated on four occasions. The fact that the appellants could not produce satisfactory evidence of their claim in respect of the exempted clearances in all these proceedings leads us to the obvious conclusion that no such clearances would have taken place during the period of dispute - thus, there is no infirmity in the aforesaid conclusions of the adjudicating authority. Penalty - Held that:- he original Show Cause Notice dated 20.11.1992 and 31.08.1993 had alleged differential duty liability of ₹ 4.69 crores and ₹ 89.51 lakhs respectively. In the course of the four adjudications which have resulted in the last 25 years, these amounts have now been whittled down to ₹ 12.70 lakhs and ₹ 2.09 lakhs respectively - is it proper to reduce the penalty imposed on Meenakshi Soap Works under Rule 173(q) of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 from ₹ 5 lakhs to ₹ 1 lakh - Similarly, the penalty of ₹ 1 lakh imposed on Aruna Industry under Rule 173(q) ibid. is reduced to ₹ 20,000/-. Appeal allowed in part.
|