2004 (7) TMI 511 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Duty and penalty pre-deposit requirement for appeal.
2. Allegations of excess stock and clandestine removal of goods.
3. Evidence from Private Registers and financial hardship claim.
4. Personal penalty imposition and safeguarding revenue interest.

Analysis:
1. The appellants were required to pre-deposit a substantial duty amount and penalties for hearing the appeal. The company sought a waiver of these amounts, citing financial hardship due to closure and no ongoing business activities.

2. The case involved allegations of excess stock and clandestine removal of cement. The department claimed discrepancies based on Private Registers, indicating unauthorized manufacturing and sales. The appellant contested the accuracy of these claims, highlighting lack of corroborative evidence and pointing out the closure of operations.

3. The Commissioner relied on evidence from Private Registers and statements to support the allegations. The appellant argued against the validity of these records and emphasized the absence of proof regarding raw material procurement and product sales. The financial hardship due to the company's closure was a crucial aspect of the defense.

4. After careful consideration, the Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of clandestine removal but noted the company's financial distress and lack of current business activities. To safeguard revenue interests, an undertaking was required to prevent asset disposal. The personal penalties on the Managing Director and Plant Manager were upheld, with a directive for pre-deposit within a specified timeframe for further appeal proceedings. Compliance deadlines were set for reporting and final hearing dates were scheduled.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, arguments presented by both parties, and the Tribunal's decision based on the evidence and legal considerations.