2001 (4) TMI 658 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Demand based on shortage of crown corks
2. Demand based on shortage of caustic soda
3. Imposition of personal penalties under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules

Analysis:

1. Demand based on shortage of crown corks:
The case involved the appellants, engaged in manufacturing aerated water, facing a demand for duty due to the shortage of crown corks. The Tribunal examined the evidence and found that duty cannot be confirmed solely based on the shortage of crown corks, as established in the precedent set by the Tribunal in a similar case. The demand was unsustainable as there was no evidence regarding the manufacture of the specific quantity of aerated water in question. Therefore, the demand based on the shortage of crown corks was set aside.

2. Demand based on shortage of caustic soda:
Regarding the demand related to the shortage of caustic soda, the appellants argued that the oversight in not showing the quantity issued from the stock register was a mistake. However, they failed to provide any evidence or explanation proving that the quantity of caustic soda in question was indeed used in the manufacture of the final product. Consequently, the demand under specific rules concerning caustic soda was upheld by the Tribunal.

3. Imposition of personal penalties under Rule 209A:
The adjudicating authority had imposed personal penalties on the Director and an employee of the company under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules. However, both the adjudicating authority and the appellate authority did not provide any findings to support that the individuals had engaged in acts or omissions to evade payment of duty. In the absence of such findings, the Tribunal deemed the imposition of personal penalties as unsustainable and set them aside. The appeals were disposed of accordingly, with the demand on the shortage of crown corks being set aside, the demand related to caustic soda being upheld, and the personal penalties being revoked.