2005 (8) TMI 480 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Revenue's challenge to setting aside demands due to lack of evidence of clandestine removal of goods.
2. Confirmation of demands, redemption fine, penalty, and interest.
3. Challenge to imposition of fine, penalty, and interest under Section 11AB and Additional Duties of Excise.

Analysis:

1. The Revenue contested the setting aside of demands by the Commissioner due to insufficient evidence of clandestine removal of goods, resulting in loss of revenue. The Commissioner noted discrepancies in the serial numbers on Central Excise invoices and bundles of fabrics, but found the absence of serial numbers alone insufficient to confirm the demand. Lack of evidence of illicit removal from the factory led to the demands being deemed untenable. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's findings, emphasizing the Revenue's failure to provide conclusive evidence of non-clearance of goods as per Central Excise invoices.

2. The Commissioner confirmed demands totaling Rs. 3,16,735/-, along with imposing redemption fine, penalty, and interest. The Tribunal reviewed the evidence and upheld the Commissioner's findings, noting the reliance on statements and corroborative evidence to support the charges. The Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's appeal, rejecting it. The cross-appeal challenging the demands and penalties was also dismissed, as the Tribunal found the Commissioner's decision well-founded and the assessees had paid the amounts.

3. The assessees challenged the confirmation of redemption fine, penalty, and interest under Section 11AB, citing the absence of the provision during the relevant period. Relying on legal precedents and circulars, the Tribunal set aside the confirmation of interest under Section 11AB. Additionally, the imposition of fine, penalty, and personal penalties under Additional Duties of Excise was contested based on legal judgments. The Tribunal, in line with the legal precedents cited, set aside the fine, penalty, and personal penalties, allowing the cross-appeal to that extent. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed, and the cross-appeal was allowed concerning the interest, fine, and penalties.