2015 (10) TMI 890 - AT - Central Excise

Waiver of pre dpeosit - clandestine manufacture and removal of excisable goods - Penalty u/s 11AC - Held that - Evidences have been brought on records by the investigation that there were clandestine manufacture and clearance of excisable goods in the form of shortage of finished good stocks and also from the private records maintained in the factory premises alongwith the statements of the concerned persons. On perusal of the case records, we find that the appellant has not made out a prima facie case for complete waiver of the confirmed dues and penalties. It is accordingly ordered that the appellant shall pre-deposit a amount - Subject to the payment of the above amount, there will be a stay on recovery of the remaining amount of duty, interest and penalties imposed - Stay granted.

Summary

Issues:
1. Confirmation of demand for clandestine manufacture and removal of excisable goods.
2. Imposition of interest and penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
3. Arguments by the appellant regarding presumption and assumption in the case.
4. Arguments by the Revenue regarding shortage in stock of finished goods and evidence of clandestine manufacture and clearance.
5. Decision of the tribunal regarding pre-deposit amount and stay on recovery.

Analysis:

1. The judgment addresses the confirmation of a demand amounting to Rs. 1,63,81,297 against the appellant for clandestine manufacture and removal of excisable goods. The Order-in-Original dated 28/03/2013 imposed interest and penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant contested the case, arguing that the allegations were based on presumption and assumption, with no concrete evidence of excess or shortage of raw materials found in the factory premises.

2. The appellant's representative, a Chartered Accountant, highlighted that the case lacked substantial evidence and that duty demand should not be solely based on hypothetical facts or uncorroborated private records. On the other hand, the Revenue, represented by an Assistant Commissioner, defended the order by citing a shortage in the stock of finished goods and the recovery of private records from the factory premises. The Revenue claimed that statements of involved individuals confirmed clandestine manufacture and clearance of excisable goods.

3. After hearing both sides and examining the case records, the tribunal found that the appellant had not sufficiently proven a case for the complete waiver of confirmed dues and penalties. The tribunal acknowledged the evidence presented by the Revenue, including shortages in finished goods stock and statements from involved individuals, supporting the claim of clandestine activities. Consequently, the tribunal ordered the appellant to pre-deposit Rs. 15.00 Lakhs within eight weeks and report compliance by a specified date. A stay on the recovery of the remaining amount of duty, interest, and penalties was granted pending the appeal's disposal.

This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive overview of the issues involved, the arguments presented by both parties, and the tribunal's decision based on the evidence and legal provisions.