2005 (3) TMI 273 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Duty demands, penalties, undervaluation of veneers and plywoods, evidence for the disputed period, confirmation of demand based on prior period evidence, sustainability of penalties.

Summary:

Duty Demands and Penalties:
The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi, in the case involving duty demands and penalties against the appellants for undervaluation of veneers and plywoods, found that the demands were confirmed solely based on evidence from a prior period. The Commissioner's order confirmed demands, interest, and penalties against the appellants for the period in dispute (1-12-2002 to 31-12-2003) relying on evidence from October 1998 to November 2002. However, the Tribunal noted the absence of evidence for the disputed period and emphasized that the same modus operandi could not be presumed to continue without concrete evidence of undervaluation during the period in question. The order was deemed unsustainable as it lacked evidence for the disputed period, following the precedent set in Alfa Ceramics Industries v. CCE, Indore - 2002 (145) E.L.T. 454. Consequently, the duty demands and penalties were held to be not sustainable, and the impugned order was set aside, with the appeals being allowed.

Operative Part of the Order:
The Tribunal's decision to set aside the impugned order and allow the appeals was pronounced in the open court on 14-3-2005.