TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 948X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onducted various checks and verifications. During the course of search of the factory, 4 pocket diaries showing details of account regarding removal of final product without payment of duty were recovered. Shri Jayantibhai J. Patel, Proprietor of the unit was present at the time of Panchnama and admitted that entries made in the pocket diaries reflected clearances without payment of duty. Statement of Shri Harish S. Patel, Supervisor of the unit was recorded on 2-10-01 itself, wherein he deposed that he was working for Pragati Industries for last five years and the said pocket diaries are written in his own handwriting and admitted that the accounts maintained in the diaries reflected the details of the quantity of stampings cleared without ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated against the appellant for confirmation of demand of duty of Rs. 50,75,400/- as also for imposition of penalty upon all the appellants. The said show cause notice stand culminated into an order passed by the Commissioner which is impugned before us. It may be clarified here that while proposing to confirm duty of Excise, the benefit of the clearances effected from other two units, as represented by the appellant was granted as also the benefit of Small scale exemption notification was granted. 5. Learned advocate appearing before us has assailed the impugned order on the ground that the documents relied upon in the show cause notice were not handed over to them and they have not been able to make full representation against the propos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e above clandestine clearances. Such statements do not stand retracted by the deponent at any point of time. Not only that, Revenue in this case, has approached the buyers (13 of them), who have admitted having purchased the goods from the appellant without the cover of Central Excise invoices. As such, we find that there is enough corroborative material on record to uphold the findings of clandestine removal. We, accordingly, uphold the impugned order confirming demand of duty of Rs. 50,75,400/- against M/s. Pragati Industries along with imposition of penalty of Rs. 40 lakhs under the provisions of Section 11AC of CEA, 1944. At this stage, we may observe that though, in accordance with the latest judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in case o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
