9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (12) TMI 1638 - AT - Central ExciseClandestine removal - precipitated calcium carbonate - Revenue s claim that the appellant is engaged in the activity of manufacturing precipitated calcium carbonate which attracts duty and the same has been cleared by the appellant in the guise of calcium carbonate which attracts nil rate of duty thereby evading payment of duty - Held that - The report of CRCL clearly shows that the samples drawn do not conform to the specification of precipitated calcium carbonate as per IS 8767-1978. On the said report, no finding has been given by the chemical examiner with regard to classification but clearly stated that these are the samples drawn are not of precipitated calcium carbonate. As it is fact on record, the appellant is manufacturer of lime stone, quick lime powder, calcite which are chargeable to nil rate of duty under CTH 2521 00 90. 2522 10 00 and 2530 90 30 respectively. In that circumstance, without any corroborative evidence, it cannot be alleged that the appellant is only manufacturing precipitated calcium carbonate. It is alleged that stock of 337 MT of precipitated calcium carbonate and 42 MT of quick lime powder which are not entered in the RG-1 register. We have seen that opening balance on 5-6-2007 as per RG-1 register. As 95 MT, 27 MT, 118 MT, 110 MT and 11 MT of precipitated calcium carbonate and production for the day 5-6-2007 was to be recorded on 6-6-2007 and the same could not be recorded due to visit of DGCEI officers on 6-6-2007 - it cannot be alleged that the seized goods were not entered in the RG-1 regiser - the demand is set aside. The raw material i.e. lime stone 40000 MT, pet coke 1000 MT and charcoal 1000 MT were also seized. The said quantity has been arbitrarily taken by eye estimation and no verification report/chart prepared and it is not possible to verify the said huge quantity of raw material in a single day - the allegation of non-accountal of goods in the statutory record is not sustainable. Demand set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues Involved:
1. Duty on account of clandestine clearances based on checkpost details of Punjab Border. 2. Duty on account of clandestine clearances based on Ledgers No. 20/1 & 20/3 of Shri Vinod Khullar. 3. Duty on account of clandestine clearances based on documents of Shri Mukul Kumar. 4. Duty on account of clandestine clearances based on GRs of M/s. Satnam Transport Co. & others. 5. Duty on account of undervaluation. 6. Duty on account of wrong availment of SSI exemption. 7. Duty on account of seizures effected at various buyers' premises. Detailed Analysis: 1. Duty on Account of Clandestine Clearances Based on Checkpost Details of Punjab Border: The demand of Rs. 2,50,70,800/- was based on checkpost details showing descriptions like quick lime, lime powder, lime stone powder, and calcite powder. The authorities did not verify whether these descriptions were incorrect. Without corroborative evidence, the demand was deemed unsustainable and set aside. 2. Duty on Account of Clandestine Clearances Based on Ledgers No. 20/1 & 20/3 of Shri Vinod Khullar: The demand of Rs. 1,03,69,193/- was based on ledgers and samples drawn from Shri Vinod Khullar's premises. The test report dated 29-11-2007 was inconclusive regarding the specification of precipitated calcium carbonate. The subsequent report dated 29-5-2008, obtained post issuance of the show cause notice, lacked evidentiary value. Consequently, this demand was also set aside. 3. Duty on Account of Clandestine Clearances Based on Documents of Shri Mukul Kumar: The demand of Rs. 45,21,421/- was based on a diary maintained by Mukul Kumar, which recorded various products. In the absence of corroborative evidence proving the diary exclusively documented precipitated calcium carbonate, the demand was unsustainable and set aside. 4. Duty on Account of Clandestine Clearances Based on GRs of M/s. Satnam Transport Co. & Others: The demand of Rs. 9,58,622/- was based on blank GRs recovered from M/s. Satnam Transport. As these GRs did not specify quantity or description, the demand, based on assumptions, was set aside without corroborative evidence. 5. Duty on Account of Undervaluation: The demand of Rs. 1,06,41,860/- alleged that the appellant underdeclared the value of precipitated calcium carbonate, describing it as other lower-valued products. Without concrete evidence proving the goods were precipitated calcium carbonate, the charge of undervaluation was unsustainable, and the demand was set aside. 6. Duty on Account of Wrong Availment of SSI Exemption: The demand of Rs. 78,26,500/- was based on the claim that the appellant's clearances exceeded Rs. 3 crore in 2003-04, disqualifying them from SSI exemption. A search in July 2004 found no case against the appellant, and all resumed documents were returned. Given the appellant did not avail credit on inputs, the demand was set aside. 7. Duty on Account of Seizures Effected at Various Buyers' Premises: The demand of Rs. 4,43,344/- was based on samples drawn from buyers' premises and tested by CRCL. The test reports were inconclusive, stating the samples did not conform to precipitated calcium carbonate specifications. Without evidence supporting that the seized goods were precipitated calcium carbonate, the demand was unsustainable and set aside. Conclusion: The tribunal found the allegations against the appellant unsustainable due to lack of corroborative evidence. Consequently, all demands, confiscations, redemption fines, and penalties were set aside. The appeals were allowed with consequential relief.
|
