TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (4) TMI 652
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ated Enterprises India P Ltd. along with imposition of penalty of identical amount. Further penalties of Rs.7 lakh stand imposed on Shri Hem Chand Jain Director of the company and of Rs. One lakh stand imposed on the other two appellants Shri S K Jain and Shri V K Jain, who are also Directors of the Company. 2. As per facts on record, M/s. Ambeecee Consolidated Enterprises India P Ltd is engaged in the manufacture of Stainless Steel ingots falling under Chapter 72 of the Central Excise tariff Act. Their factory was visited by Central Excise officer on 22.7.96, the day fixed for presentation of annual budget of 1996-97. The officers conducted various checks and took the stock verification of the goods declared by the assessee in their pre-b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tine removal of ingots by the manufacturing unit was the subject matter of another show cause notice issued to M/s. D P Industries, who were converting ingots removed by the appellants into flats. In the show cause notice issued to M/s. D P Industries, it was alleged that ingots cleared clandestinely to M/s. Ambeecee Consolidated Enterprises India P Ltd. were converted into flats by M/s. D P Industries, who cleared the same clandestinely. As such, it can be seen that evidence available in the present case for the allegations and findings of clandestinely cleared ingots are the same very evidence which were the subject matter of show cause notice issued to M/s D P Industries. Show cause notice issued to M/s. D P Industries was confirmed by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt impugned order and the Tribunals decision in the case of D P Industries, we find that as recorded in para 5 of the said decision, the basis for raising demand of duty against M/s. D P Industries were the documents recovered and seized from the residential premises of Shri Hem Chand Jain, which are also the basis of present demand. Further, the statements recorded during the course of investigation were made the basis for raising demand against M/s. D C Processors and M/s. Ambeecee Consolidated Enterprises India P Ltd. the Tribunal has looked into and examined all the said statements in their decision in the case of D P Industries and held that same is not considered to be sufficient evidence for upholding the charges of clandestine acti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sors Pvt. Ltd. and also M/s. Ambeecee Consolidated Enterprises, there should be evidence that the above units produced ingots which were not accounted for and sent the same to the appellant unit for convening them into fiats. Since ingots are dutiable and when the ingots produced are not accounted for, there should be a demand of duty on the ingots allegedly cleared by D.P. Processors Pvt. Ltd. and Ambeecee Consolidated Enterprises to the appellant unit. It is not understood as to why no demand was proposed in respect of M/s. D.P. Processors Pvt. Ltd. As the appellant strongly contend that they did only job-work and did not sell the flats, it is very necessary for the department to show that the appellant firm had indeed received payments b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and this company also manufacturers stainless steel ingots from scrap. There is a third group company viz. M/s. D.P. Processors (P) Ltd., which manufacturers stainless steel bars from the stainless steel ingots. The basis of the case against the appellant company in this case is certain documents recovered from the residential premises of M/s Hem Chand Jain on 23.07.96. According to the department, the documents at sl.no.6 contain datewise account of production and clearance of the stainless steel ingots during July, 1996 giving the opening balance, production, clearance and closing balance and similarly, the documents at sl.no.9 contain similar account of the production of stainless steel ingots during November, 1995 to Feb., 1996 and the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... absolutely no evidence to conclude that these figures do not include the production accounted for by these two companies on which the duty has been paid and that these figures represent only the unaccounted production of these two companies. The statement of Shri Sanjay Jain, an employee of M/s. D.P. Processors (Pvt.) Ltd., does not indicate as to which documents pertain to M/s.Ambeecee Consolidated Enterprises India Pvt. Ltd. and which documents pertain to M/s. D.P. Processors (Pvt.) Ltd. While the Commissioner in para-27 of the impugned order gives a finding that Shri Sanjay Jain in his statement has stated that the records mentioned at Sl.No.6, 9 & 13 of the Annexure to the Panchnama pertain to the Appellant and that he has specifically....