Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2024 (1) TMI 1155 - AT - Central ExciseClandestine removal - suppression of production under valuation and clandestine clearance of sponge iron - demand confirmed on the basis of computer printouts seized from the Appellant s premises - under valuation - difference between RG-1 Daily Production and Consumption of Material Report and Daily Stock Tally Report - penalties. Demand of Rs.32, 36, 758/- has been confirmed on the basis of the details available in the computer print-out - HELD THAT - The Appellant stated that the computer print-out recovered from their office does not belong to them. It belonged to one Mr.Sanjay Bhalotia a trader having business relationship with the Appellant. It is found that the said Sanjay Bhalotia through an affidavit dated 24.01.2008 claimed that those papers belonged to him and he had inadvertently left those papers on the table of Nimananda Pradhan on 19.05.2006 when he had visited the Appellant s Office about an hour before the search by DGCEI - the statement dated 18.02.2009 has no evidentiary value as the Appellant has not been informed about the contents of the statement. Without sharing it with the Appellant it cannot be used against him. Accordingly the statement dated 18.02.2009 cannot be taken to into cognizance. Demands of Rs.32, 36, 758/- and Rs 3, 37, 080/- have been worked out on the basis of the details available in the computer sheets recovered from the office of the Appellant - HELD THAT - The department has not followed the mandate under section 36B and the author of the entries made in the computer printout has not been identified. Accordingly it is observed that the computer sheets recovered cannot be relied upon to work out the duty liability on the allegation of clandestine removal. As the demands mentioned at Sl. no (i) and (ii) of para 2 has been confirmed solely based on the data available in the computer print outs the demand of Rs. 32, 36, 758/- and Rs 3, 37, 080/-confirmed only on the basis of computer print-outs seized from the Appellant s premises is not sustainable and accordingly the same is set aside. Demand of Rs. 18, 37, 986/- confirmed on the basis of difference between RG-1 Daily Production and Consumption of Material Report and Daily Stock Tally Report - HELD THAT - In this case the shortages have been arrived at on the basis of the registers maintained by the Appellant themselves. The reasons for the discrepancies have to be explained by the Appellant only as they are the authors of the entries made in the Registers. However the Appellant could not give any valid explanation for the shortages. Thus the discrepancies in the registers itself is sufficient to corroborate the clandestine clearance. Accordingly the demand of Rs. 18, 37, 986/-confirmed on the basis of difference between RG-1 Daily Production and Consumption of Material Report and Daily Stock Tally Report is sustainable. The Appellant is liable to pay this duty along with applicable interest. As the Appellant has suppressed the actual production with an intention to evade payment of duty they are liable for penalty equivalent to the duty evaded under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act 1944 read with Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules 2002. Penalty on the Director Sh.C.S.Grewal - HELD THAT - It is observed that only part of the demand confirmed in the impugned order is held to be sustainable. Hence the penalty can be imposed only in proportion to the demand confirmed. Accordingly the penalty imposed on the Director Shri. C.S. Grewal from Rs. 10, 00, 000/- reduced to Rs. 2, 00, 000/-. Penalty imposed on Mr. Nimananda Pradhan Manager - HELD THAT - The incriminating documents recovered have been found to be not reliable and the demand confirmed based on the document has been held as not sustainable. Hence the penalty imposed on the Manager on that basis of these documents also will not survive. Accordingly the penalty imposed on Shri. Nimananda Pradhan is set aside. Penalty imposed on Sh. R.S. Pandey DGM as the head of production - HELD THAT - It is observed that he is an employee of the company. His duty is to carry out the work as ordered by the management. He has accounted the production as advised by the Director of the company. In a family based private limited company the Director is the ultimate beneficiary of the illegal activities. The Director has already been held responsible for the short accountal of sponge iron and penalty has been imposed on him. Thus Mr. R.S.Pandey DGM being employee of the company is not liable for penalty and accordingly the penalty imposed on him is set aside. Appeal disposed off.
|