2017 (6) TMI 418 - AT - Central Excise

Clandestine manufacture and removal - copper wire and ingots - Held that - the seizure of Indian currency for ₹ 23.15 lakhs from the premises of the main appellant was one of the main evidence for the revenue, to conclude that the appellants indulged in unaccounted clearance - It was recorded that the said amount cannot be attributed to sale proceeds of excisable goods, illegally manufactured and cleared by the appellant. As such, one of the main basis on which the present demand was sustained has been held to be unsustainable. Another important aspect relied upon by the Revenue is the production of excisable goods, refined copper wire bars on 20th and 21st September, 2005. Admittedly, the appellants had capacity of making around 4 metric tonnes of the finished goods per heat - the impugned order did not discuss at tall, about the physical possibility of the main appellant manufacturing 13 metric tonnes of refined copper wire bar per day for two consecutive days. Revenue failed to establish the unaccounted manufacture and clearance of excisable goods with any creditable evidences and as such the impugned order is liable to be set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Central excise duty demand based on alleged clandestine manufacture and clearance of excisable goods
- Seizure of Indian currency and its relevance as evidence
- Capacity of the main appellant for manufacturing refined copper wire bars
- Reliance on hand-written slips and the need for cross-examination
- Compliance with procedural requirements under Section 9D of the Central Excise Act, 1944

Analysis:

1. The case involved appeals against an order demanding central excise duty due to alleged clandestine manufacture and clearance of excisable goods by the main appellant, a copper wire and ingots manufacturer. The investigation was initiated based on information suggesting unaccounted production and clearance of goods. The Original Authority confirmed duty demand and imposed penalties on the main appellant and its Director, which were upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals).

2. The relevance of the seizure of Indian currency amounting to ?23.15 lakhs was a crucial aspect of the case. The appellants argued that the currency had been returned following a Tribunal order that the confiscation was not tenable. This currency seizure formed a significant basis for alleging clandestine clearance, and its confiscation was deemed unsustainable, weakening the revenue's case.

3. The capacity of the main appellant to manufacture refined copper wire bars was contested. The Revenue claimed production figures exceeding the appellant's known capacity, raising doubts about the accuracy of the calculations. The impugned order failed to address the physical feasibility of the alleged production levels, a critical oversight in assessing the duty liability.

4. The reliance on hand-written slips and the lack of identification of the author raised concerns. The appellant's request for cross-examination to clarify the production slips was not granted, violating procedural requirements under Section 9D of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The failure to follow prescribed procedures jeopardized the reliability of the evidence presented by the Revenue.

5. The judgment highlighted the necessity of strictly adhering to procedural requirements, citing a precedent from the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court emphasizing the mandatory nature of such procedures. The lack of legally tenable and admissible evidence supporting the revenue's claims led to the setting aside of the impugned order, as the unaccounted manufacture and clearance of excisable goods were not credibly established.

6. Ultimately, the appeals were allowed, and the impugned order was set aside due to the failure of the Revenue to substantiate the allegations of clandestine activities with credible evidence, highlighting the importance of procedural compliance and reliable evidentiary support in excise duty cases.