2007 (9) TMI 203 - HC - Central Excise

Documentary evidence shows that the appellants have cleared finished excisable goods without payment of duty - details of Out- going Gate Passes (OGPs) and duty paid invoices do not tally and their dates are different - procedural requirements contemplated by Rule 173H not fulfilled Tribunal was justified in rejecting the plea of assessee that verification can now be carried out because the assessee had failed to file the necessary declaration at relevant time - no merit in appeals

Summary

Issues:
Appeals under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 challenging a consolidated order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi regarding clearance of excisable goods without payment of duty.

Analysis:
The High Court Punjab & Haryana considered two appeals filed by the Company and the Director under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appeals challenged a consolidated order passed by the Tribunal, which found that the appellants had cleared finished excisable goods without paying duty. The Tribunal based its decision on admissions made by the Company's Manager under Section 14 of the Act, admissions by the Director, and other documentary evidence. It was noted that the details of Outgoing Gate Passes (OGPs) and duty paid invoices did not match, and invoices produced against OGPs were not accepted due to non-compliance with procedural requirements as per Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Tribunal relied on a judgment of the Supreme Court in a relevant case. The High Court also mentioned that a previous appeal by another party had been dismissed by a Division Bench, upholding the same consolidated order. Therefore, the High Court found no merit in the current appeals and dismissed them.

In conclusion, the High Court Punjab & Haryana dismissed the appeals after considering the evidence, admissions, procedural requirements, and relevant legal precedents. The decision was based on the findings of the Tribunal, including discrepancies in documents, non-compliance with rules, and previous dismissal of a similar appeal. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding the clearance of excisable goods without payment of duty.