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

Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-I Versus K.P. Pouches (P) Ltd.

2017 (2) TMI 1258 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Clandestine removal - Gutkha - demand on the basis of entries made in the unloading registers and gate registers - Held that: - the department has not checked the manufacturing capacity of the manufacturing assessee and also the vouchers at the time of booking the gutka from Delhi. The entire duty demand was based on the entries made in the unloading registers and gate registers. - M/s. Supreme was also transporting gutka of other companies which were having the different trademarks like Goa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

icating authority for the purpose of duty. So, the duty was levied only on 2404 bags which were having the trade mark of “Rajshree” and “Safal” brand (in code also). The respondent-assessee is not for the duty payment for the brands which were not manufactured by them - there is no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the adjudicating authority. - Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - E/691/2010 - Final Order No. 50632/2017 - Dated:- 3-2-2017 - Dr. Satish Chandra, Pr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r has confirmed the duty of ₹ 12,63,77,557/-. Being aggrieved, both the parties have filed the appeals. The respondent-assessee filed Appeal No. E/2806/2010 but did not make the pre-deposit so the Tribunal has dismissed their appeal as non-maintainable. However, against dropping of the demand, the department has filed the present appeal. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent-assessee M/s. K.P. Pouches (P) Ltd., during the relevant period, were engaged in the manufactu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

onducted at the two godowns of M/s. Supreme situated at Raipur. Both those godowns were located at Mahadev Ghat Chowk; and near Indian Oil Depot Ring Road No. 1, respectively. The search was conducted in the presence of the Director of M/s. Supreme. During search, stock of nine bags lying in the godown were found. Three vehicles were also found parked in the premises of the godown, where gutka was loaded. As per the details given in the impugned order, the total bags of 2404 were found having th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

we have heard Shri G.R. Singh, ld. AR for the Revenue and Shri Rupesh Kumar, ld. Advocate for the respondent-assessee. 4.1 Ld. Counsel for the department has relied on the show cause notice. He submits that the department has examined thirteen nos. of Unloading Registers and two nos. of Gate Registers. These registers contain inter alia the details of the receipts and unloading of seven bags in the godown premises of M/s. Supreme and dispatch/disposal of gutka from the premises of M/s. Sup .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

M/s. Supreme. Finally, he submits that entire load of the gutka mentioned in the registers of M/s. Supreme belongs to the assessee-respondent. Hence, the adjudicating authority has wrongly dropped the partly demand. 4.2 On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the respondent-assessee Shri Rupesh Kumar relied on the impugned order. He submits that the appellant has only fifty machines even if had it run in three shifts basis then capacity of 12325 bags can have been produced per month so, it is w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bmits that the entire case material including the 13 unloading registers has recorded a specific 23,321 bags which bore the mark LT, LTABK, K, ABK, GK, GK, GKABK and 10 contain the gutka under the brand name of Rajshree and Safal belonging to the respondent-assessee. The assessee has nothing to do with the other brands of gutka. 5. We have heard both the sides at length and gone through the material on record. From the record, it appears that the search was conducted at Raipur at the premis .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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