2013 (11) TMI 1090 - AT - Central Excise

Clubbing of the Clearances Clandestine Removal of Goods - Waiver of Pre-deposit - There are adequate corroborative materials on record sharing relevancy of those materials making the investigation story successful unearthing clandestine removals - The materials clearly suggest that questionable modus operandi was followed by the appellants - Once corroboration evidence suggests ill will of appellants mere absence attestation shall not be entertained as defence plea at this stage since law of evidence applies to the fiscal proceedings instead of Evidence Act applicable to such proceedings Relying upon Benera Valves Vs. CCE 2006 (11) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA - thus Revenue s successful investigation cannot be faulted nor credence challenged by flimsy pleas at the interim stage - the appellant is directed to make further deposit of Rs.85 Lakhs as last Installment.

Summary

Issues:
1. Clubbing of clearances of two concerns operated by the same individual.
2. Allegations of clandestine removal and clearances.

Clubbing of Clearances:
The judgment discusses the clubbing of clearances of two concerns, Anil Sales Corporation and Jain & Company, both operated by the same individual, Shri Pawan Kumar Jain. The adjudicating authority found evidence suggesting that these concerns were not distinct but operated by the same person. Despite the appellant's argument that the concerns were different and manned by separate individuals, the tribunal agreed with the adjudicating authority upon examining the materials. The tribunal noted that similar goods were manufactured by both concerns, further supporting the conclusion that they were not separate entities. The revenue supported the findings of the adjudication on this matter.

Allegations of Clandestine Removal and Clearances:
The judgment also addressed allegations of clandestine removal and clearances. The adjudication order highlighted evidence of questionable modus operandi by the appellants, leading to prejudice against the revenue. The tribunal observed that there were corroborative materials, including statements and a Panchnama, linking the appellants to clandestine activities. The appellant's argument that the statement from Shri Pawan Kumar Jain was not credible was dismissed, emphasizing that the law of evidence applicable to fiscal proceedings does not require attestation of statements. The tribunal ordered the appellant to make a further deposit of Rs. 85 lakhs in installments due to financial difficulties expressed, with failure to comply leading to dismissal of the appeals.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the judgment upheld the clubbing of clearances due to the lack of evidence supporting the separation of the concerns operated by the same individual. Additionally, the tribunal found merit in the allegations of clandestine removal and clearances based on the evidence presented, disregarding the appellant's challenge to the credibility of statements. The order for a further deposit aimed to protect the revenue's interest while considering the appellant's financial constraints, in line with legal precedents and ensuring compliance with the directives.