Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 629 - CESTAT AHMEDABADPenalties on co-noticees - Clandestine removal - the ground of defense of Shri Rinki S. Gandhi is that he has not physically dealt with the goods being Managing Director of the Company and therefore, penalty under Rule 26 cannot be imposed - Held that:- The beneficiary of the entire amount of ₹ 1,24,91,612/- would have been Shri Rinki S. Gandhi directly or indirectly. In these circumstances, the penalty on Shri Rinki S. Gandhi is rightly leaviable. However, the penalty of ₹ 25 Lakhs imposed on the appellant is disproportionate - quantum of penalty reduced. Penalty imposed on Shri V.K. Vora and Shri H.S. Nagraj - Held that:- The investigations pointed out that Shri H.S. Nagraj, Manager (Sales and Administration) was maintaining regular invoices as well as the other invoices on which clandestine removal was done and also maintaining the record of illicit clearances by pencil in a private record. He was also giving directions for removal of the goods. Similarly, Shri V.K. Vora, President (Material) of M/s. Motorol Speciality Oil Limited was also giving direction for removal of inputs to job workers for which no entries were made in the Central Excise records. He was also instrumental in directing the employees of M/s. Motorol Speciality Oil Limited for appropriating the job work challans showing a huge quantity returned as residue - thus, they were directly involved in the entire activities of evasion - however, quantum of penalty is reduced. Penalties have also been imposed on M/s. M/s. Motorol Speciality Oil Limited, Halol and M/s. Motorol Lubricants Pvt. Limited, Vadodara under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - Held that:- The quantum of penalty is reduced. Appeal allowed in part.
|