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 - 2006 (2) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2006 (2) TMI 441 - AT - Central Excise

Issues:
1. Duty demand based on alleged excess clearance of hydrogen gas.
2. Challenge against Commissioner's order setting aside demand and penalty.
3. Admissibility of company officer's admissions during investigation.
4. Verification of gas quantity through international formula and cylinder pressure.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi involved two appeals by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Indore against an order-in-order-appeal of Commissioner (Appeals), Customs & Central Excise, Indore. The appeals were consolidated and addressed together. The case revolved around M/s. Grasim Industries Limited's clearance of hydrogen gas to M/s. Goyal M.G. Gases Ltd., where duty was paid based on the quantity determined at the recipient's end from November 1995 to November 1997. Subsequently, a show cause notice was issued alleging a higher quantity of gas clearance, resulting in a duty demand of Rs. 10 lakhs and penalties.

During the appeal process, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the demand and penalty, citing no excess clearance based on the international formula used and verification of 200 cylinders. The appellants challenged this finding, arguing that the company officer had admitted to the higher quantity during the investigation. However, the Tribunal found no merit in the appeal, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision. The Tribunal highlighted discrepancies between the officer's statements and the actual cylinder pressure verification, emphasizing that facts ascertained through investigation take precedence over statements.

Ultimately, the Tribunal confirmed the impugned order, rejecting the appeals. The judgment underscored the importance of factual verification over statements and upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision based on the international formula and cylinder pressure readings.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates