TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 466X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... legation of clandestine removal as well as on the shortage of finished goods and raw materials. It is further found that not a single instance of clandestine removal have been found by revenue by way of interception of any consignment without proper invoices/challan etc. There is not reasonable basis for imposition of penalty under Section 11AC/Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 - the penalty set aside under Section 11AC on the appellant company and also the penalty imposed on the two directors Shri Promod Lunawat Shri Mukesh Singhaniya under Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules, 1944 are set aside. Appeal allowed. - Excise Appeal No. 50908-50909 & 50931/2021 - FINAL ORDER No. 50967-50969/2022 - Dated:- 11-10-2022 - SHRI A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d and the proposed demand was confirmed by the Commissioner vide O-I-O dated 31/03-2006. Being aggrieved, the appellant had appealed before this Tribunal and vide final order no. 52720-52722/2016, this Tribunal took notice that the impugned O-I-O have been passed without providing copy of the relied upon documents. Thus, the appellant was prevented by contesting the SCN, and thus there was miscarriage of justice. This Tribunal also took the notice of the submission by revenue that all the RUD s are not available with them. The Tribunal set aside the Order-in-Original and remanded the matter back to the Commissioner to decide the SCN de novo after providing copies of the RUD s to the appellant-assessee. 4. Pursuant to remand, vide O-I-O d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unal confined the demand of clandestine removal of formaldehyde to 1378.595 MT. Further, observed that appellant shall be liable for duty on the shortage found in the stock of raw materials and finished goods at the time of search. The Tribunal allowed the appeal by modifying the Order-in-Original and remanded for re-quantification of duty and to decide the issue of penalty on the basis of revised computation. 6. Pursuant to remand vide O-I-O dated 14/12/2020, the duty demand have been ascertained as follows: Sr. No. Quantity MT Rate per MT Value (Rs.) Central Excise duty @ 18% (Rs.) Remarks i. 262.400 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal. Learned Counsel Mr. Abhishek Jaju inter alia assails the imposition of penalty on the appellant Co. and its directors. Learned Counsel urges that in spite of admitted fact that the installed capacity of the appellant is 3000 MT per annum and admittedly, they have shown clearance of formaldehyde during the relevant period of 3066 MT during the financial year 1998- 1999. Thus, the confirmation of demand for alleged clandestine removal maintained by this Tribunal at 1378.595 MT is without any reasonable basis. This is evident from the pleading in the show cause notice wherein the demand have been raised on the basis of presumption and assumption, on the basis of resumed documents, ignoring the installed capacity of the factory of the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
