Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Imperial Tubes Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-II

2016 (11) TMI 783 - CESTAT KOLKATA

Clandestine removal of manufactured goods - M.S. ERW Black Pipe & M.S. Scrap falling under chapter sub-heading No.7306.90 & 7204.90 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 - Held that: - reliance placed on the decision of the case of Umiya Chem Intermediate vs. Commissioner of C.Ex. & Cus [2008 (7) TMI 376 - AHMEDABAD HIGH COURT], where the issue is similar - it was held in the case that when there is proper appreciation of evidence on record on the basis of the incriminating documents found in 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

30,725/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand Seven Hundred and Twenty Five only) on the stock found short is overlapping and it is inclusive of the total demand raised. On this limited portion alone, I remand the matter to the Adjudicating Authority to verify the same with the records. On the basis of the above findings I uphold the impugned Order-in-Appeal except to the limited portion remanded. Appeal is disposed of accordingly - E/445/07 - FO/A/76151/2016 - Dated:- 8-11-2016 - Shri P. K. Choudhary, Member .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nit of Calcutta-II, visited the factory premises of the Appellant and conducted stock verification of the finished goods. During the period 17.02.1998 to 04.06.1998, it is alleged that the said company cleared 544.013 M.T. of M.S. ERW Black Pipe and 25.87 M.T. M.S. Scraps valued at ₹ 84,32,886.20 and ₹ 1,45,518.75 respectively involving duty of ₹ 14,36,761.00 from their factory without recording the same in any of the statutory Central Excise records/documents with intent to ev .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

akhs deposited by the Appellant was appropriated and also imposed equal penalty under Section 11AC and also ordered recovery of interest at the appropriate rate under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Appellant being aggrieved, preferred an appeal before the Ld.Commissioner(Appeals), who rejected the Appellant's Appeal and upheld the Order-in-Original. 3. Heard both sides and perused the Appeal records. 3.1 I find from the records that the Appellant's factory was visited .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

department, it appears that the Appellant was in the practice of removing their final product under the cover of duplicate set of Challans without paying Central Excise duty and without observing any Central Excise formalities. Stock of finished goods lying in the factory of the Appellant was verified in the presence of the Appellant's authorized representative and shortage of 11.813 M.T.s of M.S. ERW Black Pipes and 25.87 M.T. of M.S. Scraps were found. Further statements were also recorde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tebook and the statements taken from the Appellant's Supervisor and Director of the company without any corroborative evidence. This is not acceptable for the reason since it is crystal clear from the impugned order that the recordings in the private notebook which was seized from the Appellant's premises is clearly tallying with the second set of challans which were seized, proves beyond doubt the Appellant's modus operandi. Further the statements given by the Supervisor and the Dir .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

preliminary investigation was carried out, the Appellant's representative was present and no objections were raised by them at any stage of investigation and they have signed the report as a token of acceptance of the same. Therefore, the grounds raised by the Appellant are not acceptable. The Ld.Counsel further submits that the waste and scrap which was removed without payment of duty was generated during the construction of factory, is not corroborated with any evidence and hence not acce .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version