2018 (11) TMI 674 - AT - Central Excise

Clandestine removal - shortages of raw material and excess of final products - violation of Rule 10 of Central Excise Rule, 2002 - confiscation - redemption fine - penalty - Held that - The decision in the case of COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., KANPUR VERSUS SARADA STEEL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. 2010 (7) TMI 596 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI needs to be followed - the Original Adjudicating Authority has upheld the confiscation by imposing redemption fine of ₹ 13.18 lakhs and penalty of ₹ 6.78 lakhs. The same is required to be upheld but fine & penalty needs to be reduced - appeal allowed in part.

Summary

Issues:
- Confiscation of raw materials and finished goods
- Reduction of redemption fine and penalty
- Compliance with High Court's order

Confiscation of Raw Materials and Finished Goods:
The case involved a factory engaged in manufacturing steel ingots and other products where shortages of raw materials and excess stock of final products were detected during a search by Central Excise Officers. The Original Adjudicating Authority initiated proceedings against the factory for violation of Central Excise Rule, 2002, leading to the confiscation of raw materials and finished goods. The Commissioner (Appeals) later reduced the redemption fine and penalty, holding finished goods not liable for confiscation but the shortages of raw material liable. The Tribunal allowed the factory's appeal and rejected the Revenue's appeal, leading to a challenge by the Revenue before the High Court.

Reduction of Redemption Fine and Penalty:
The High Court observed a previous contrary view taken by the Tribunal in a similar case and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. In compliance with the High Court's order, the matter was reheard, and the Tribunal's previous decision in a similar case was followed. The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of excess goods but reduced the redemption fine and penalty by almost 50% compared to the Original Adjudicating Authority's imposition.

Compliance with High Court's Order:
In applying the ratio of the previous decision to the present case, the Member (Judicial) upheld the confiscation of goods and imposition of penalty but reduced the quantum of redemption fine and penalty to 50% of the original amounts imposed by the Adjudicating Authority. Both appeals filed by the Revenue and the factory were disposed of accordingly, with the judgment pronounced on 14/11/2018.