Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (7) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2017 (7) TMI 325 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
i) Re-credit of duty on returned goods
ii) Evasion of duty through fictitious invoices
iii) Scrap generated by job-worker without duty support
iv) Levy of duty on goods claimed to be destroyed

Analysis:
1. The appellant faced disputes regarding the re-crediting of duty on goods returned by customers. The goods reached Bangalore and Chennai factories but not Pune. The appellant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for this procedural deviation, leading to a dismissal of the appeal on this count due to lack of transparency.

2. The second issue involved the clearance of goods against disputed invoices, amounting to a duty of &8377; 53,62,232. The Revenue alleged that the invoices were fictitious, and the appellant failed to explain the creation of these invoices. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for further examination of the genuineness of the invoices and the appellant's modus operandi to determine if Revenue was prejudiced.

3. The third issue pertained to the scrap generated by the job-worker without supporting duty documents, leading to a dismissal of the appeal on this count due to lack of clarity in the records.

4. The final issue revolved around the levy of duty on goods claimed to be destroyed during manufacture. Upon examination, no merit was found in this claim, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal on this count as well.

5. The appellant requested the adjudicating authority to consider the penalty aspect based on the findings of the remand. The authority was directed to examine the gravity of the matter and pass an appropriate order, with penalty being leviable on the sustained duty demand and interest on unpaid duty.

6. The appeal was remanded for re-adjudication on one specific count, emphasizing the need for an expeditious resolution due to the prolonged pendency of nearly 11 years in the Tribunal.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates