TMI Blog2007 (6) TMI 96X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lows: (a) M/s. Shri Govind Synthetics (P) Ltd. and M/s. Rajesh Enterprises are units situated in adjacent premises. Shri Priyankbhai Agarwal is a proprietor of M/s. Rajesh Enterprises and also an authorized signatory of M/s. Shri Govind Synthetics (P) Ltd. and was managing both the units. (b) When the officers visited the unit on 21-9-2001, they found 16709/- L. Mtrs. of cotton fabrics and 4020 L. Mtrs. of MMF processed by M/s Rajesh Enterprises and kept in the premises of M/s. Shri Govind Synthetics (P) Ltd. for certain further process. (c) On a follow up, they also found 6235.75 L. Mtrs. of cotton fabrics removed by M/s. Rajesh Enterprises at the premises of M/s. Delux Roadlines (P) Ltd. (d) In respect of the goods seized from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hetics (P) Ltd., and did not demand a sum of Rs. 29,932/- in respect of goods seized from M/s. Delux Roadlines (P) Ltd., confirmation of demand of the said amounts by original authority is beyond the scope of show cause notice and upholding of the said order of Commissioner (Appeals) is not sustainable. Para 24 of the show cause notice specifically refer to the demand of duty being separately made in respect of the goods seized/removed outside the factory. The demand of duty on the goods seized from M/s. Delux Roadlines (P) Ltd. by the original authority is clearly beyond the scope of show cause notice. Further, the goods belonging to M/s. Rajesh Enterprises were still lying with M/s. Shri Govind Synthetics (P) Ltd. and therefore, not remov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... practice, M/s. Rajesh Enterprises has chosen to pay the duty involved. I have not been shown any disputes having been raised by M/s. Rajesh Enterprises regarding duty having been wrongly paid by them. Under the circumstances, the show cause notice merely taking the note of the fact that duty has been paid without raising a demand is of no great significance or consequence. In the show cause notice proposing confiscation and imposing penalty, the original authority need not have recorded that the sum of Rs. 54,354/- as confirmed as there was no dispute before him about the payment of said amount. 6.2 However, same analogy cannot apply in respect of the demand of Rs. 29,932/- relating to the goods seized from M/s. Delux Roadlines (P) Ltd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
