9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 360X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... NEG) was supposed to have been used by the Appellant for the manufacture of soap. Though Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, on the basis of the Appellants records issued End Use Certificates certifying that the imported CPO-(NEG) was used in the manufacture of the soap, the DGCEI Officers, on receipt of an intelligence about illicit diversion of the imported CPO-(NEG) for purposes other than in manufacture of soap, initiates inquiry into this matter. In this regard the officers visited the Appellants factory on 15.02.05 and found that while except for negligible quantity of CPO(NEG), there was no stock of any other raw-material in the factory, there were no workers in the factory. 1.2 One of the main raw-material of manufacture of soap is Caustic Soda and as per the Appellants records, Caustic Soda had been purchased by them from M/s.Punjab Sales Corporation, Amritsar. However, on inquiry with Sh. Nalin Kumar, Proprietor of M/s. Punjab Sales Corporation, Amritsar, he, in his statement on 28.07.05 under section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1996, stated that he had neither purchased Caustic Soda during 2004-2005 nor sold any Caustic Soda to the Appellant duri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,27,02,400/-, Rs. 35,93,070/-, Rs.36,39,000/-, Rs.1,05,02,729/-, Rs.1,09,63,788/- respectively totaling Rs. 5,15,46,247/-. This amount of outstanding payment itself appeared to be a clear indication that the transactions regarding sale of soaps are bogus. 1.6. Inquiry was made with Sh. Jagdish Arora, Proprietor of the Appellant company, and his statements were recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 on22.06.2005, 31.05.2006 and 31.08.2006 wherein on being confronted with the statements of Sh.Nalin Kumar, Proprietor of M/s. Punjab Sales Corporation, Amritsar and Sh. Avatar Singh, Proprietor of M/s. Garcha Transport, Ludhiana, he admitted that those statements are correct, that no Caustic Soda has been purchased by him and no soap have been manufactured or sold by him and that no goods have been transported through M/s. Garcha Transport, Ludhiana. 1.7. Sh. B.S. Gill, Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise who had issued the End Use Certificates, in his statement dt. 31.01.2006, stated that End Use Certificates were issued without physical verification. 1.8 In view of the above investigation, a Show Cause Notice dt. 03.09.2006 was issued to the Appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the statements of Caustic Soda supplier and the transporter which are against the Appellant, but the Caustic Soda supplier and the transporter have not been made parties to these proceedings for imposition of penalty on them for fabrication of false documents, that the Appellant have strong prima facie case in their favour and that in view of this, the amount of Rs.6 lakhs already deposited is sufficient for hearing of this appeal and the requirement of pre-deposit of the balance amount of duty demand, interest thereon and penalty may be waived for hearing of the appeal and recovery thereof may be stayed till the disposal of the appeal. 4. Sh. A.K. Jain, learned Jt. CDR, strongly opposed the stay application by reiterating the Commissioners finding in the impugned order and emphasized that the Caustic Soda is one of the main raw-material for manufacture of soap, that Sh. Nalin Kumar, Proprietor of M/s. Punjab Sales Corporation, the Caustic Soda supplier, has categorically denied to have supplied any Caustic Soda to the Appellant, that the statement of Sh. Avatar Singh, Proprietor of M/s. Garcha Transport, Ludhiana, through whose truck the finished goods are shown to have been tra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ietor of M/s. Garcha Transport, he stated that no goods of the Appellant have ever been transported by him, that his company is engaged in supply of construction material like sand and one truck owned by him is used only for supply of sand etc, and that the GRs showing transportation of the goods of the Appellant by the Truck of his company have not issued by him. 8. We also find that while Sh. Rajeev Kumar Arora proprietor of M/s. Aashana Enterprises, Amritsar one of the buyers of soap, has clearly denied to have purchased any soap from the Appellant. Four other buyers M/s.Dee Ess Trading Co.; M/s. Shree Ganesh Trading Co.; M/s. Ellora Sales; M/s. Vikas Enterprises have been found to be fictitious. In respect of M/s. Ellora Sales, Jodhpur inquiry was also made with commercial taxes office and Assistant Commisssio9ner, CTO, Jodhpur vide letter dt. 05.07.06 informed that M/s. Ellora Sales never dealt with soaps and the sales tax registration of this firm has been cancelled vide order dt. 16.03.06 for non filing of returns. M/s. Pankaj Enterprises, Ludhiana, the sixth buyer inspite of being summonsed several times, could not produce any document in support of his claim of purchase o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
