Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (5) TMI 1200

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... main appellant. We find that the Original Authority has to record the various evidences alongwith the reason for admitting such evidences after giving due consideration to the appellant’s plea. When the appellants made request specifically in writing for cross examination of the persons whose statements have been relied upon, the Original Authority's finding on such request has to be recorded. We find the request for cross examination itself has not been recorded. While admittedly non-payment of duty exist in this case, the quantification of non-paid duty has to be arrived at by analyzing the evidences and taking into account the defence submission alongwith their plea for cross examination as sought for by the appellant. Considering the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cted. 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 duty of ₹ 2,78,16,835/-; for confiscation of seized MS Pipes from two different premises; for imposition of penalties under the various provisions of Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2. On receipt of the above-mentioned show cause notice all the noticees (now the appellants) approached the Settlement Commission by filing application under Section 32E of Central Excise Act, 1944. They have accepted a duty evasion of ₹ 10,85,000/-. On examination of their application and after getting report from the Commissioner, the Settlement Commission rejected the applications i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mption 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 present appeals are filed. 4. The learned Counsel for the appellants mainly submitted on the following lines :- (a) They have requested in their written submissions cross examination of dharamkanta owners whose statements were relied upon in the show cause notice. In addition they have relied upon an affidavit of Shri Ati Uttam their former employee in their support. They have also requested for examining the said employee in pursuance of the said affidavit ; (b) While they have admitted the duty liability of around ₹ 22 lakhs, as mention .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... xamined 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 Original Authority rightly relied on the observations made by the Settlement Commission and the Honble Delhi High Court. The fact that appellants were involved in clandestine removal is clear and admitted. Their plea that they have not been given fair opportunity to defend the case before the Original Authority cannot be admitted in view of overwhelming evidence as detailed in the show cause notice which is the basis of the conclusion drawn by the Original Authority. The learned AR also submitted that the affidavit of disgruntled emp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ication 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 Authority to pass an order on duty liability or otherwise based on the evidences brought forth during investigation and countered by the appellants in the proceedings before him. It is apparent that the admission of the main appellant to the limited duty liability, as mentioned above, and the rejection of their application for settlement of the case has been the main reason for confirmation the whole demand against the main appellant. We find that the Original Authority has to record the various evidences alongwith the reason for admit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates