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

2018 (5) TMI 1040

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... were engaged in the similar modus operandi. Penalties on the partnership and on the individuals - Held that: - M/s Sunrise Metal Corporation and M/s Prathmesh Steel being registered dealer would be covered under the provisions of Rule 25 (1) (d) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, as they have contravened the provisions of Central Excise Acts and Rules made thereunder by issuing an invoice which was not accompaning by the goods as indicated on the documents - Upholding the of imposing penalty on the said firm, interest of justice can be met if penalty imposed on M/s Sunrise Metal Corporation is reduced to ₹ 70,000/- from ₹ 1,31,168/- and in the case of and M/s Prathmesh Steel to ₹ 25,000/- from ₹ 67,677/-. Personal .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e for consideration are appellants M/s Sunrise Metal Corporation and M/s Prathmesh Steel, a partnership firm, were charged in the show-cause notice of issuing invoices which were not accompanying with the goods indicated in the said documents and that they were passing ineligible CENVAT credit to their purchasers. After detailed investigation, adjudicating authority held that M/S Sunrise Metal Corporation and M/s Prathmesh Steel had, in fraudulent manner without the goods being delivered on the invoices, assisted M/s Harisons Steel Ltd to avail ineligible CENVAT credit; the vehicle in which bazaar scrap was loaded and seized at the premises of M/s Harisons Steel Ltd was confiscated and redemption fine was imposed and personal penalties were .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... question; that provisions of Section 119 of the customs Act, 1962 as applicable to Central Excise Act was invoked and the provisions of Section 119 of the Customs Act, 1962 will not apply as the said section willapply to the goods used for concealing smuggled goods. He submits that in the case in hand, there is factual finding as to which goods were concealed by bazaar scrap seized by the authorities. Hence, confiscation needs to be set aside. 6. Learned D.R. reiterating the order-in-appeal submits that the penalty provisions have been correctly invoked as the partnership firm and the individuals were engaged in passing on ineligible CENVAT credit to M/s Harisons Steel Ltd., that the partnership firm and the individuals were knowing tha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the goods indicated on the duty paying documents, It is also to be noted that appellant partnership firms M/s Sunrise Metal Corporation and M/s Prathmesh Steel had shown in their books of accounts, receipt of duty paid scrap from the manufacturer of Iron and Steel which itself in doubt, is the claim of the Revenue. Be that as it may, the fact that the goods accompanying the duty paying documents was not stainless steel but were local scrap is itself enough to hold that the penal provisions invoked against the partnership firms is correct. Penalty imposed on the firm by the adjudicating authority is under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. It is the contention of the learned Counsel that the provisions of Rule 25 of the Central Ex .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... situation wherein the goods which were seized are used for concealing of smuggled goods. In the case in hand it is an admitted fact that the local scrap which was seized was not concealing any goods i.e. stainless steel scrap in order to hold that the said goods are liable for confiscation. The finding of the first appellate authority that the consignments in the trucks were cleared as per invoices but were replaced with goods with intention to mislead Revenue by suppressing the facts, hence liable for confiscation at par with the goods meant for concealing, is the finding which are very assumptive and presumptive in nature and being so needs to be set aside. In view of this, I find that the confiscation ordered by the lower authorities in .....

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