Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2019 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (9) TMI 68 - HC - Central ExciseImposition of penalty - Clandestine manufacture and removal - gross undervaluation of products manufactured and sold - demand based on various gross undervaluation of products manufactured and sold - retraction of statements - Whether the imposition of penalty to the tune of ₹ 20 lakhs on the appellant without any documentary evidence and based on uncorroborated oral statements was proper? HELD THAT:- The orders of the Adjudicating Authority and the Tribunal would indicate that the accounts were examined, statements were recorded and there was finding that the company have resorted to unaccounted raw materials and administrative expenses. There was also evidence of clandestine removal of goods. These were all discernible from documentary evidences and the computer statements recovered on search. Being the Managing Director of the company during the relevant period, the appellant could not have been exonerated from the liability, in view of the evidence, which have been elaborately discussed by the fact finding authorities. The appellant cannot state that he was not aware of the activities of his factory. Retraction of statements given on oath, alone would not exonerate him. There is absolutely no reason for us to re-appreciate the evidence on facts. There is no illegality or infirmity pointed out by the Counsel appearing for the appellant to interfere with the findings on facts by the authorities and the Tribunal. The question of law as framed by us following those raised in the memorandum, is in fact a question of fact. The various documentary evidences and the statements recorded on oath amply prove the clandestine despatch of manufactured goods from the factory leading to suppression and undervaluation. Appeal dismissed.
|