Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Kesarwani Zarda Bhandar Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad

2016 (1) TMI 1009 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

Shortage of raw tobacco and coloured tobacco - clandestine removal - demand under proviso to Section 11A(2) and also imposed a penalty of equal amount under Section 11AC along with interest - Held that:- Revenue has tried to prove the charge of clandestine removal merely on the basis of presumptions and assumptions and when the shortage has been explained with verifiable facts with regard to raw tobacco and coloured tobacco, but the Revenue did not verify the facts and in the absence of proper v .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ajeev Ranjan, AR ORDER Per: S S Garg: This appeal is directed against order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 17.5.2007 upholding the decision of the adjudicating authority. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of branded chewing tobacco falling under sub-heading No. 2403 99 10 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and is availing cenvat credit to the extent of specified duty paid on inputs as p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

was unaccounted and it appears that the same has been removed without accountal of the same in record and without payment of central excise duty. In this manner, the appellant has allegedly contravened the provisions of Rules 4, 6, 10, 11 and 12 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. In reply to the show cause notice, the manager of the appellant, Shri Onkar Nath Gupta, in his statement recorded by the officers of the department, explained the reasons for the shortages as manifested on the record. T .....

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 for the appellant submitted that there was no shortage of raw tobacco and coloured tobacco which is manifested on record as the alleged shortage has been explained by the manager, Shri Onkar Nath Gupta. The learned counsel further submitted that Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 does not require an assessee to make as many entries as there are transactions. He also submitted that charge of clandestine removal is based on mere presumptions and assumptions and moreover, the shortage was .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f final products. A copy of declaration under Rule 22(2) of the Rules is annexed by the appellant. All records are maintained on daily basis at the close of the day. Further, the Rules do not require that every time there is an issue of raw material, it should be recorded in statutory records. There is no provision under the law to issue slips for raw tobacco on which no cenvat credit has been taken. The learned counsel explained the process of manufacture of final product step by step. The firs .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bacco continued to be in the premises and were verifiable by the officers on their visit on 2.12.2004, but the officers did not physically verify the same. 5. On the other hand, the learned AR reiterated the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. For better appreciation, Rule 10 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 reproduced below:- "(i) Every assessee shall maintain proper records, on daily basis, in a legible manner indicating the p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

reasons for shortage of raw tobacco and coloured tobacco stored in their respective store rooms. There cannot be any presumptions and assumptions contrary to verifiable facts. We have gone through the statement of Shri Gupta and we find that the alleged shortage of goods could have been verified as per the statement of Shri Gupta, but the department instead of doing the verification for determining the shortage, relied upon the only fact that the appellant did not produce the issue slips. The l .....

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 law." 6.2 The learned counsel also placed reliance on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kalvert Foods India Put. Ltd. vs. CCE, Mumbai reported in 2003 (152) ELT 131, wherein the Tribunal has held as under:- "10. It is well settled that the charge of clandestine removal/ manufacture of the goods by the assessee has to be established by the Department by producing cogent, convincing and tangible evidence and such a charge cannot be based on assumptions and presumptions. In .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

xtended period as envisaged under proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 has been invoked on the ground that short found raw material has not been recorded in the account books/records maintained by the unit and dutiable goods have been cleared without issuing invoices etc. on the sole intention of evading duty. He also submitted that invoking the extended period is wrong because the entire raw tobacco and coloured tobacco were duly accounted for and available in the manufactu .....

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 entire facts including those explained by their manager were in the knowledge of the officers since then, but in spite of that the impugned show cause notice was issued on 6.12.2005 i.e. beyond the period of limitation of one year and therefore the entire demand is not sustainable being barred by limitation. In this context, the appellant relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Studio Line Interior System Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Bangalore-I reported in 2006 (201) ELT 250 (Tri.-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

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version