9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 1200X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral Excise, Delhi - II. Brief facts of the case are that the main appellant M/s Metalex Pipes Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of MS Pipes liable to Central Excise duty. They were registered with the Central Excise Department but they were not paying duty claiming turnover based small scale exemption during the material period. In February, 2002 the Central Excise officers conducted search in various premises in connection with possible non-payment of duty by the main appellant. Thereafter various documents were recovered, statements recorded and enquiries were conducted. On completion of investigation show cause notice dated 03/8/2002 was issued to various parties. For the main appellant the notice was for demand of Central Excise dut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... full and true disclosure of their duty liability for the proceedings to continue before the Settlement Commission. 3. Consequent upon the rejection of applications by the Settlement Commission, the case was taken up for adjudication by the Original Authority. The applicants filed their detailed replies before the Original Authority. The impugned order dated 27/03/2009 was passed by the Original Authority confirming the duty demand in full as made in the show cause notice; confiscation of seized MS Pipes and allowing them to be redeemed on payment of redemption fine, imposing penalty of equivalent to duty amount on the main noticee herein and imposing various other amounts of penalties on the other appellants. Aggrieved by this order, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en some admitted portion of liability before the Settlement Commission were also held to be not payable ; (e) He further submitted that they have filed detailed written submissions and their pleas were not adverted to and examined for a decision before confirmation of the full duty demand. 5. The learned AR opposed the contention of the appellants. He submitted that in both the proceedings before the Settlement Commission as well as before the Honble Delhi High Court the manner of clandestine activity of the appellant have been examined and prima facie findings have been recorded. The appellants did not make full and true disclosure of duty liability. The same is clear from the findings in these proceedings. He also submitted that the O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iginal Authority to examine and give his finding on the various submissions made by them in writing. This includes, primarily, on the request for cross-examination and also their submissions regarding the authenticity of computer records, trading accounts and the veracity of weighbridge owners statement. We agree that a perusal of the original order apparently indicates that a heavy reliance have been placed on the observations of the Settlement Commission as well as High Court passed in connection with rejection of their application for settlement of their case under Section 32E of the Act. While it is nobody case that such observations cannot be taken into account in the course of adjudication, it is the duty of the Adjudicating Authorit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
