Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Sharp Carbon India Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Kanpur

2015 (9) TMI 522 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Extended period of limitation - wilful suppression of fact or commission of any fraud - suppression of production of goods and clandestine removal - Held that:- firstly the assessee had not produced invoices etc. despite being demanded by the Central Excise Officers vide letters dated 10.1.1990, 23.1.1990, 5.3.1990, 27.3.1990, 24.4.1990 and 14.5.1990 and when the Central Excise Officers visited the manufacturing unit on 17.5.1990 then the appellant took the stand that the records have burnt in a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the alleged fire accident except stating that the intimation was sent by letter under Certificate of Posting.

The concurrent findings of fact recorded by the fact finding authorities, as briefly noted above, clearly attracted the proviso to Section 11- A(1) of the Act. Removal of goods in the name of dummy unit and unestablished purchases from one M/s. Ajay Traders for trading purposes were clearly the result of suppression of facts and fraud by the appellants and, therefore, the Adju .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

atia, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri B.K. Singh Raghuvanshi, learned senior standing counsel for the respondent. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits as under: (i) The impugned final order No.895-897/2003-B dated 3.12.2003 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, is wholly erroneous, inasmuch as, the Tribunal has not recorded any finding on invocation of the extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11-A of the Central Exci .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ine manufacture was on the Department which it failed to discharge. (v) The order was delivered by the Tribunal after 11 months of the hearing of the case and thus the order is bad in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of Anil Rai Vs. State of Bihar (2001) 7 SCC 318. 3. In support of his submissions learned counsel for the appellants has relied upon the judgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise Vs. Chemphar Drugs and Linime .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Surat Vs. Saheli Leasing and Industries Ltd. (2010) 253 E.L.T. 705 S.C., Chandna Impex Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi (2011) 269 E.L.T. 433 S.C., Anil Rai Vs. State of Bihar (2001) 7 SCC 318, Uniworth Taxtiles Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur (2013) 288 E.L.T. 161 S.C. and Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Triveni Sheet Glass Works Ltd 2005(11) SCC 443. 4. Sri B.K.S. Raghuvanshi referred to the show cause notice, the finding rec .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l are findings of fact based on consideration of relevant material and evidence on record and as such they can not be interfered with in appeal. 6. He relied upon the judgments of Hon. Supreme Court in the case of Usha Rectifier Corpn (I) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (2011) 11 SCC 571, Commissioner of Central Excise Visakhapatnam Vs. Mehta & Co.(2011) 4 SCC 435 and a Division Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs, and Central Excise, Ghaziabad Vs. M/s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

India Pvt. Ltd. The said Firm/Company was engaged in the manufacture of various stationery items including carbon papers and Sealing Wax etc. The Sector Officer of the respondent-Department wrote a letter dated 10.1.1990 followed by reminders dated 23.1.1990, 5.3.1990, 27.3.1990, 24.4.1990 and 14.5.1990 requesting the appellants to furnish invoices. Neither invoices were submitted nor any intimation in this regard was given by the appellants. Acting on an intelligence report that the appellants .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

garwal partner and General Power of Attorney holder of the appellants stated that the records were burnt in a fire accident on 20th April 1990 and an FIR was lodged with the concerned police station and intimation to the Central Excise Department was sent under Certificate of Posting on 20th April 1990. On the basis of the evidences available on record, a detailed show cause notice dated 25.11.1992 for the year 1987-88 and 1989-90 followed by corrigendum dated 12.5.1993 was issued to the appella .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iginal No.14 dated 4.2.2000 confirming the demand of Central Excise duty of ₹ 27,32,902.02 and also imposed penalty of ₹ 2 lakhs on the appellants under Rule 173-G of the Central Excuse Rules 1944 and the penalty of ₹ 2 lakhs each on Sri Deepak Agrawal and M/s. Rohit Enterprises. 10. Being aggrieved, the appellants and other co-noticees filed separate appeals before the Customs & Excise Appellate Tax Tribunal, New Delhi. 11. The appeal of the present appellants was numbered .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ned order the Tribunal has recorded following findings of fact: We have considered the submissions of both the sides. We observe from the perusal of the impugned order that the Commissioner has not accepted the plea of the appellants about purchase of carbon paper from M/s. AJAY TRADERS on the ground that the consignment Notes were dated 28.11.89,10.12.89, 20.12.89 and 11.2.90 whereas the Bills raised by Ajay Traders are dated 11.3.90 only and that their purchase order is dated 21.1.90. In view .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r goods had been submitted by the appellants even if the goods were resold, the figure cannot be taken into record as it does not amount to any additional sale. We also not find any substance in the submission of the learned Advocate that the quantum of excisable goods could not be arrived at from the Balance Sheet. The Balance Sheet is an important document which contains details of the entire year and the figures mentioned therein cannot be simply brushed aside. It is for the appellants, who h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ss any machine for the manufacture of carbon paper, no technically qualified person had been employed in that unit. The Commissioner has rightly discarded the affidavit of K.K. Tripathi which has been given to the Department after more than one year. Even in the affidavit, he had confirmed that Rohit Enterprises had taken machines from the appellant. This shows that the appellants were having the capacity to manufacture the carbon paper. The finding of the Commissioner that both Sh. K.K. Tripath .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Enterprises as a dummy unit and the clearances shown against its name are, in fact the clearance made by the appellants. 8. Regarding Sealing Wax, we observe that the learned Advocate has shown a Sales Tax form reflect the sale of the same to Dilip Enterprises. The learned Advocate has also mentioned that the Tariff rate of duty is nil in respect of Lack falling under sub-heading 13.01.10 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act. This aspect has to be looked into by the Adjudicating Auth .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

h. Deepak Agarwal is also set aside as penalty has already been imposed on the partnership firm." 14. From the facts noted above, it is clear that the respondent Department had asked the appellants to furnish invoices vide letter dated 10.1.1990, followed by reminders dated 23.1.1990, 5.3.1990, 27.3.1990, 24.4.1990 and 14.5.1990, but the appellants did not comply. On an intelligence report that the appellants are indulging in suppression of production of goods and clandestine removal thereo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of Posting. The Central Excise Department Officers also inquired about the fire accident and raised doubt about the occurrence of fire accident and burning of Central Excise related records, since no damage was caused to furnitures etc. The Adjudicating Authority required the appellants to produce the records and Books of Accounts but they were not produced on the ground that records were burnt in fire accident. 15. Thus we find that firstly the assessee had not produced invoices etc. despite b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

relevant to note that although the appellants were knowing well that the Central Excise Officers are repeatedly asking certain documents to be produced yet they had not given any intimation with regard to the alleged fire accident to the concerned Central Excise Officers about the alleged fire accident except stating that the intimation was sent by letter under Certificate of Posting. All these facts and circumstances were clearly indicative of suppression of material facts by the appellants. 16 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the fire accident, the Budge day stock taking and annual stock taking had been conducted in March 1990 and nothing adverse was noticed, the department, on the other hand, has expressed doubts or this version of the party in view of non-receipt of any intimation of fire, non-submission of documents despite repeated queries and the report of the sector officer who had investigated the fire accident and found that neither was the fire brigade called nor was the furniture of the party damaged. It ob .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of Adjudicating Authority in this regard, the Tribunal observed that the alleged bills of Ajay Traders are dated 11.3.1990 against the alleged purchase order dated 21.1.990 whereas the alleged consignment notes were dated 28.11.1989, 10.12.1989, 20.12.1989 and 11.2.1990. The Tribunal found that the balance sheet was an important document, figures of which can not be simply brushed aside. The Tribunal also recorded a finding of fact that M/s. Rohit Enterprises was a dummy unit and the clearance .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version