2003 (12) TMI 377 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Failure to pay the correct duty resulting in a penalty imposition under Rule 173Q.

Analysis:
The appellant, engaged in manufacturing industrial laminates, cleared goods to depots and buyers after paying duty based on price lists filed either in proforma I for dealers or in proforma part II for industrial consumers. The removals in proforma part II were estimated by the appellant, occasionally leading to a situation where more goods were required than cleared, prompting the appellant to clear additional goods at a lower rate under part I price. However, between 1981 and 1986, the appellant omitted to pay the differential duty on some occasions, leading to a notice for duty evasion.

The appellant argued inadvertence rather than intent to evade duty, citing instances where it had advised the department and paid the duty upon discovery of short payment. The Tribunal noted the irregular conduct of the appellant, emphasizing that duty paid subsequently at depots was not reflected in assessment documents, posing inherent risks. The appellant's failure to pay correct duty even after discovery of short payment raised concerns about its procedural compliance. The Tribunal found the appellant's actions to be irregular and unwise, indicating a disregard for legal procedures, ultimately concluding that there was an intention to evade duty, supported by the evasion that occurred.

Despite acknowledging the department's inaction in preventing such procedures, the Tribunal deemed it insufficient to absolve the appellant. The penalty imposed was considered appropriate, factoring in the gravity of the offense and the appellant's disregard for legal and procedural requirements. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the penalty for failure to pay the correct duty, as per Rule 173Q.