2013 (10) TMI 956 - AT - Central Excise

Clandestine removal of Goods Waiver of Pre-deposit Held that - There was clandestine removal of the rickshaws - there was under-valuation of the said rickshaws which were cleared from the factory premises - the appellant admitted that they were procuring the diesel engines and gear boxes which are required for the manufacture of rickshaws in their name as well as in other fictitious names and manufacturing and clearing the rickshaws - All the legal points and issues raised can be considered at the time of final disposal of appeal - the appellant has not been able to make a prima facie case in his favour - the appellant directed to deposit an amount of Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs as pre-deposit upon such submission rest of the duty to be waived till the disposal Partial stay granted.

Summary

Issues:
- Stay petition for waiver of pre-deposit of duty, interest, and penalty due to alleged clandestine removal of goods without Central Excise duty discharge.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD, delivered by Mr. M.V. Ravindran, dealt with a stay petition seeking a waiver of pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs.52,48,132, along with interest and penalty equal to the duty. The adjudicating authority had confirmed these amounts due to the alleged clandestine clearance of goods from the factory premises without paying the appropriate Central Excise duty. The tribunal heard arguments from both sides and reviewed the records presented. The appellant's Chartered Accountant highlighted the Order-in-Original, the Show Cause Notice, and other documents to argue against the allegations of clandestine removal of goods.

Upon examination, the tribunal found that the issue revolved around the clandestine removal of 'Chhakkdo Rikshaws'. The adjudicating authority had made a reasonable finding based on evidence, including under-valuation of the rickshaws cleared from the factory premises. The appellant's proprietor had admitted to procuring diesel engines and gear boxes under fictitious names for manufacturing and clearing the rickshaws. Despite the legal points raised by the Chartered Accountant, the tribunal concluded that the appellant had not established a prima facie case in their favor at that stage. Therefore, the tribunal directed the appellant to deposit Rs.25 lakhs within twelve weeks and report compliance by a specified date. Upon compliance, the waiver of pre-deposit for the remaining amounts was allowed, and recovery stayed pending the appeal's disposal.

This judgment underscores the importance of establishing a prima facie case to support a stay petition seeking a waiver of pre-deposit in cases involving allegations of clandestine removal of goods and non-payment of Central Excise duty. The tribunal's decision to require a partial deposit and subsequent compliance reflects a balanced approach to addressing the issues raised while ensuring the interests of revenue protection and due process in the adjudication of appeals related to excise duty matters.