2002 (1) TMI 120 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Confirmation of duty demand
2. Reduction of penalty amount
3. Reduction of redemption fine
4. Setting aside of interest confirmed under Section 11AB

Analysis:

Issue 1: Confirmation of duty demand
The appellants, engaged in manufacturing electric fans, availed the benefit of a notification for exemption based on their total clearance. Central excise officers intercepted goods without duty documents, leading to seizure of electric fans from the factory premises. Post-seizure investigations revealed lack of statutory records and use of brand names belonging to others, impacting exemption eligibility. Statements confirmed lack of maintenance of production records. The note book seized contained details of fan clearance, with entries corroborated by statements. The appellate tribunal upheld the duty demand, considering the entries in the note book and statements as evidence of clandestine removal, despite appellant's contentions.

Issue 2: Reduction of penalty amount
While the duty demand was confirmed, the penalty amount was reduced from Rs. 26,73,583 to Rs. 10,00,000. The appellants argued that the note book belonged to the Manager for a separate business, but failed to provide evidence supporting this claim. The tribunal found the entries in the note book clear and consistent, indicating clandestine removal of fans, justifying the penalty reduction based on the circumstances.

Issue 3: Reduction of redemption fine
The redemption fine for seized goods was also reduced from an initial amount to Rs. 10,000. The tribunal's decision was influenced by the repeated use of the same vehicle for transporting goods without duty, as recorded in the note book. The lack of documentary evidence supporting the appellant's claim of a separate business by the Manager weakened their case, leading to the reduction in redemption fine.

Issue 4: Setting aside of interest under Section 11AB
The tribunal set aside the interest confirmed under Section 11AB, considering the period of the case before the enactment of these provisions. As a result, the interest was waived in this particular instance. The decision was based on the circumstances and legal framework applicable during the relevant period, aligning with the specific details of the case.

In conclusion, the appellate tribunal upheld the duty demand, reduced the penalty amount and redemption fine, and waived the interest under Section 11AB, emphasizing the importance of maintaining accurate records and compliance with excise regulations.