2007 (7) TMI 507 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in this judgment include passing on Modvat credit to end-users, fraudulent issuance of invoices, evasion of duty, imposition of penalty under Rule 173-Q(i)(bbb) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and the corroboration of evidence regarding the transportation of goods under the invoices.

Excise Appeal No. 2715/2005-SM:
The appellant acted in connivance with Majestic Industries Ltd. in passing on Modvat credit to end-users through void invoices, leading to the imposition of a penalty of Rs. 35,548/- under Rule 173-Q(i)(bbb) of the Rules. The investigation revealed discrepancies such as non-existent transport company, fake signatures on documents, and absence of goods in stock, establishing the fraudulent nature of the transactions. The appellant's involvement in defrauding the Revenue was confirmed, justifying the penalty.

Excise Appeal No. 2716/2005-SM:
Similar fraudulent activities were observed in this appeal, where the appellant admitted to receiving and issuing modvatable invoices without actual receipt of goods. The penalty of Rs. 10,000/- was rightly imposed under Rule 173-Q(i)(bbb) read with Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, based on the appellant's role in duty evasion.

Excise Appeal No. 2717/2005-SM:
In this appeal, the appellant acknowledged receiving modvatable invoices from Majestic Industries Ltd. and passing on Modvat credit without physical receipt of goods. The penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under Rule 173-Q(i)(bbb) read with Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, was upheld by the Appellate Commissioner due to the appellant's involvement in the fraudulent scheme.

Arguments and Corroboration:
The appellant's counsel argued lack of independent evidence to prove non-transportation of goods under the invoices. However, the Department's representative provided corroborative evidence, including statements from truck drivers, non-existent transport company, and disowned signatures on documents, supporting the admission of fraudulent activities. The Tribunal's precedent in a similar case further strengthened the Department's case. The material on record confirmed the absence of goods transportation under the invoices, justifying the penalties imposed on the appellant.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed all three appeals, as the evidence established the appellant's involvement in facilitating inadmissible Modvat credit through fraudulent invoices. The authorities correctly assessed the facts and penalties, warranting no interference by the court. The judgment was pronounced on the 18th day of July, 2007.