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 →

M/s Mittal Pigement Pvt. Ltd. Versus CCE, Jaipur

2016 (9) TMI 1016 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Suppressed production of clandestine clearances of goods without payment of duty - approximation production considering average yield of the product viz. zinc oxide out of the raw material issued - department has not gone beyond the approximation of yield shown as 70 to 84% - average yield overall had been shown as 77.60%. - Demand alongwith interest and imposition of penalty. - Held that:- there is nothing on record from the Revenue side to come to a reasonable conclusion to say that there .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ts. In this regard we seek support from Hon’ble Allahabad High Court’s decision in the case of Continental Cement Company Vs. Union of India [2014 (9) TMI 243 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] and Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Oudh Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Union of India [1962 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] and CESTAT’s in the case of Punalur Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. CCE [2008 (8) TMI 471 - CESTAT, BANGALORE]. In view of the above, the impugned order in respect of confirmation of duty for alleged .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion from this Tribunal. It is hereby sustained. - Appeals disposed of - E/2058-2059/2009-Ex.(DB) - Final Order No. 53232-53233/2016 - Dated:- 26-8-2016 - Mr. Justice (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President and Mr. Ashok K. Arya, Member (Technical) Shri A.R. Mahdav Rao, Advocate- for the appellant Ms. Neha Garg, D.R.- for the respondent ORDER Both the sides have been heard in detail. 2. The appellants M/s Mittal Pigment Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Ramesh Kumar Agarwal, Director are is in appeal against the order .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

posed on Shri Ramesh Kumar Agarwal, Director of the appellant company under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. 3. The respondent is Commissioner, Central Excise, Jaipur-I. The case of the Revenue is that as the appellant No. 1 is a manufacturer of Zinc Oxide, who during different periods depending upon the form of raw material have had different yields of the product viz. Zince Oxide, but the yield has to be in the range of 70% to 84%, which comes to an average of 77.60%. The statement o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

-I-O) dated 19.5.2009 confirmed the duty demand of ₹ 2,30,39,602/- along with interest. 4. The appellants have been represented by ld. Advocate Shri Madhav Rao, who has inter alia submitted as under : (i) Annexure A to the show cause notice (at page 20 of the appeal) shows that on an average the output for all the periods under consideration has to the extent of 77.60%. For the year 2002-03 the yield has been 94.41% and there is no demand, similarly for 2005-06 where the yield has been 87. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

any number of impurities are present in the input also varying from batch to batch, and there is no standard input with standard predetermined quantity of zinc. In the statement itself which is relied upon, extracted at page 35 (of Paper Book) it has clearly come out that from zinc dross the output would be 70 to 80% and from scrap 50 to 70% for the recovery of zinc oxide. A perusal of pages 49/50 (of appeal) shows that the input basket will have materials like iron, aluminium, lead and so on. E .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ealisation of such level of sale proceeds, finished products received details from the buyers, excess power consumption required for such a volume of manufacture would surely be available. However, the Department has not led in any evidence whatsoever in this regard. The allegation of clandestine removal has to fail on the strength of the decision of the Hon ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Continental Cement Company Vs. Union of India - 2014 (309) ELT 411. (iv) That the input output norm .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

set aside. 5. We have carefully considered the facts on record and the submissions of both sides along with the case laws cited. 6. Revenue has made out its case of suppressed production of clandestine clearances of goods without payment of duty solely on the basis of approximation production considering average yield of the product viz. zinc oxide out of the raw material issued, which has been in the nature of different varieties like zinc dross, zinc ingots etc. and which are of different puri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd duty is not correct, considering the varieties of zinc scrap like Saves, Scabs, Scribe and so on used by the appellant. 6.1 Further the department has not gone beyond the approximation of yield which they have shown as 70 to 84% in col.3 of Annexure-A attached to the show cause notice and average yield overall had been shown as 77.60% which has been made the basis for issuance of the show cause notice (SCN) as well as for confirming the duty of central excise by the impugned order dated 19.5. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion and by a mere statement of the Director of the company. Unless there are further corroborations in the form of documentary evidences, which could be like despatch details for the production, receipt details of the said material, transactions of the sale money, transportation details of such goods, details of additional consumption of electricity for such suppressed production a prudent individual would not agree with the present conclusions of the Revenue. There is nothing on record from the .....

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