9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ertain documents were recovered and statements were recorded. The following discrepancies were observed : (i) M/s.Emkaay are purchasing raw materials like MS Pipes, MS tubes, etc. and manufacturing scaffolding items like Panel, Prop. Span etc. falling under Chapter heading 7308 of Central Excise Tariff and clearing the same to various customers. They are availing Cenvat credit on inputs and they are also trading in certain items. (ii) M/s.Emkaay have cleared certain finished goods without issue of Excise Invoices and without payment of appropriate excise duty but through Despatch Notes to M/s.Abiirami Constructions, R.K. Padmanabhan, P.M. Ayyasamy, etc. but shown the excise duty amount in the Despatch Note. (iii) M/s.Emkaay have recei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed by them. 2.2 With regard to issue (v), he submitted that the allegation is that there is difference in value of the goods manufactured and cleared as declared in E.R-1 returns vis-a-vis the quantity shown in the balance sheet. This difference is only because the appellant manufactured the goods on job work basis for which they are not liable to duty. These goods which were thus manufactured were sold / traded. Traded goods were also shown in the balance sheet whereas the same was not reflected in the ER-1 returns as the appellant is not liable to pay excise duty. Moreover appellants had sought time to give a detailed reply showing break up of these figures. Detailed additional reply was filed on 13.07.2015. Meanwhile, the adjudicati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the fact that order-in-original was passed before the additional reply could be filed by appellants, I am of the view that the matter requires to be remanded to the original authority for reconsideration of this issue as discussed above. 6. The authorities below have imposed equal penalty under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 on the proprietor of the firm. When Section 11AC penalty has been imposed on the appellant firm, such imposition of equal penalty on its proprietor is highly unwarranted. The adjudicating authority shall look into the penalty imposed on the proprietor. Further in such de novo consideration, the adjudicating authority shall also consider the benefit of reduced penalty as provided under Section 11AC of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
