Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2005 (11) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2005 (11) TMI 358 - AT - Central Excise

Issues:
- Duty payable on 200 bags of cut tobacco removed clandestinely without payment
- Duty payable on 700 bags of cut tobacco removed allegedly without payment

Analysis:
1. Duty on 200 bags of cut tobacco:
The appeal was filed against an Order-in-Original confirming a demand of Rs. 5,20,200/- for Central Excise Duty on 200 bags of cut tobacco removed clandestinely without payment. The adjudicating authority imposed penalties, fines, and confiscation. The appellant did not challenge this demand. The Tribunal upheld the demand, confiscation, and fines related to these 200 bags as there was no serious challenge to this issue.

2. Duty on 700 bags of cut tobacco:
The second demand in the same order related to 700 bags of cut tobacco alleged to have been removed without payment of duty. The appellant strongly contested this demand, arguing there was no evidence to show these bags were cleared without duty payment. The Revenue claimed the bags were removed without payment based on records and statements. The Tribunal carefully reviewed the case records and found discrepancies in the Revenue's evidence. The Tribunal gave the benefit of doubt to the appellant, setting aside the demand for duty on the 700 bags. However, the demand for duty on the 200 bags was confirmed, along with related fines and penalties. The penalty on the appellant was reduced from Rs. 5,00,000/- to Rs. 1,00,000/-.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the demand for duty on 200 bags of cut tobacco removed clandestinely without payment, along with related penalties and fines. The demand for duty on 700 bags of cut tobacco was set aside due to insufficient evidence. The penalties imposed on the appellant were adjusted accordingly. The appeal was disposed of in favor of the appellant in part and the Revenue in part.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates