Feedback   New User   Subscription   Demo   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 Reliable Sponge Pvt. Ltd., Shri Rajendra Kr. Dua Versus Commr. of Central Excise & S. Tax, Rourkela

2018 (2) TMI 394 - CESTAT KOLKATA

Penalty - clandestine removal - shortage of finished goods - Held that: - the entire charge of clandestine removal of goods is based on labour attendance register. The Central Excise officers searched the factory premises and could not find any other corroborative evidence to link the said labour attendance register to alleged clandestine removal of goods. In my considered view, the charge of clandestine removal of goods cannot be sustained merely on the basis of labour attendance register, whic .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is no material available on record of clandestine removal of the shortage material and the imposition of penalty under section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is not warranted. - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Ex. Appeal Nos.75542/16 & 75562/16 - ORDER NO.FO/A/75139-75140/2018 - Dated:- 5-2-2018 - Shri P. K. Choudhary, Hon ble Judicial Member Shri Damodar Pati, Adv. for the Appellant Shri A. K. Biswas, Supdt. (A.R.) for the Revenue ORDER Per Shri P. K. Choudhary These .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ration at the factory premises of the appellant. They recovered one private register bearing document no. 18. A joint physical stock verification was conducted on 21.09.2010 and a shortage of finished goods was found involving Central Excise duty of ₹ 9,312/-. A Show-cause notice dated 03.08.2011 was issued proposing demand of duty of ₹ 20,59,776/- along with interest and penalty. Penalty was imposed on the ground of alleged clandestine removal of goods on the basis of document no. 1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

these appeals. 4. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 5. The ld. Counsel drew the attention of the bench and submitted that the abovementioned private register is nothing but the attendance register of the labourers. The case of the Revenue is that as per the said document number 18, the month-wise production of sponge iron as recorded for the period from January, 2010 to August, 2010 is 26309.55 MT, while the total clearance was 27203.21 MT. But the RG-1 record showed that the tot .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that the labour register seized records the attendance of the labourers. On the back side of the said labour register, rough entries are available which cannot be treated as correct figures of production and dispatch. It is also stated that the said entries are not collaborative with any evidence. It is contended that Shri Biswal appeared before the Central Excise officers and stated that such figures have been recorded by Shri Dwivedi. Therefore, Shri Biswal is not the author of the said recor .....

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 document no. 18 and RG-1 register document no. 50 month-wise. It is seen that in the month of March 2010, the document no. 18 showed production as 2890.38 MT. But, at the same time, the RG-1 register showed production as 4070.51 MT. Similarly, in the month of June 2010, document no. 18 recorded production as 2407.44 MT, whereas RG-1 register recorded it as 2622.50 MT. Therefore, there is no parity in the figures reflected in document no. 18 and the RG-1 register. The appellant contended before .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

factory premises and could not find any other corroborative evidence to link the said labour attendance register to alleged clandestine removal of goods. In my considered view, the charge of clandestine removal of goods cannot be sustained merely on the basis of labour attendance register, which is uncorroborative in nature. The Tribunal, in the case of Golden Steel Corporation Ltd. v. CCE, Kolkata-II [2017 237 ELT 570 (Tri.-Kol.)], observed that the clandestine removal of goods is a serious cha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hed that quantities shown in the said Daily Performance Report of H.R. Strips were manufactured during the period 18-8-2005 to 31-8-2005. It is observed that this document recovered from the factory premises of GSCL only indicate the quantities tested by the Quality Control In-charge of the appellant and does not convey the daily manufacturing quantity of GSCL. Statement of Shri Pradip Chatterjee dated 7-3-2006 also indicate that this report is not maintained regularly. There is no correlation b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

grieved party. If for any reasons the request cannot be entertained then the same has to be rejected and informed to the concerned party separately for redressal if he intends to appeal against such rejection. In the absence of cross-examination of the concerned witness the evidentiary value of that statement is lost. Reliance placed by the Revenue on Section-36A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Apex Court s decision in the case of AC C. Ex Rajamundry v. Duncan Agro Industries Ltd. (supra) wi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e committed. No doubt Shri Rajnish Gambhir, Director of GSCL gave evasive/ambiguous version but never admitted to have indulged in clandestine manufacture and removal of finished goods. In such a factual matrix evidences like procurement of extra raw materials, power consumption, any transit seizure of clandestine clearances, etc. become relevant for corroboration. Alternately third party s statement, being used against the appellants was required to pass the test of cross-examination. The case .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e clandestine activity but there is no positive evidence that any goods were clandestinely cleared. There is no statement to this aspect or a transit seizure of alleged clandestinely cleared goods. The case of RHL Profiles Ltd. v. CCE Kanpur (supra) relied upon by the department was a situation where a cash of ₹ 8,30,000/- was seized from the residence of the MD and total production arrived at was compared with the RGI register during these months as recovered in Paras 1.1 and 1.2 of this .....

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