2007 (3) TMI 174 - AT - Central Excise

Un-accounted stock Entries of production of 16 July was remained to be entered in RG-1 register on 17 July This is only a technical violation No allegation of clandestine removal in SCN Duty demand was not disputed by appellant so same is upheld Redemption fine and penalty reduced

Summary

Issues:
Violation of excise duty accounting | Confiscation of unaccounted goods | Imposition of penalties

Violation of Excise Duty Accounting:
The case involved a company visited by Excise officers who found unaccounted goods valued at Rs. 7,69,087 involving duty of Rs. 1,23,064. The company claimed the unaccounted stock was from the previous day's production and the current day's first shift, pending entry due to the absence of the Excise Clerk. The original authority found the company guilty of not accounting for the goods. The Tribunal noted that the production of two shifts of the previous day was not promptly recorded until the officers' visit, constituting a technical violation. However, no intention to evade duty was found, and no allegation of clandestine removal was made. The duty demand was upheld as uncontested.

Confiscation of Unaccounted Goods:
The original authority confiscated the unaccounted goods but allowed redemption on payment of a fine of Rs. 2 lakhs. The Tribunal reduced the redemption fine to Rs. 20,000, considering the circumstances. The penalty imposed on the company was reduced to Rs. 10,000. The penalty imposed on the Commercial Manager was set aside due to a lack of specific violation proof against him.

Imposition of Penalties:
The Tribunal found that while there was a failure to promptly record the production in the register, it was only a technical violation. The penalty under Rule 173Q was reduced to Rs. 10,000 for the company and set aside for the Commercial Manager. The Tribunal emphasized the absence of evidence of intention to evade duty and the lack of clandestine removal allegations. The appeals were partly allowed with reduced fines and penalties, upholding the duty demand but reducing the redemption fine and penalties imposed.