9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (11) TMI 269X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... S ingots. During the course of checking of RG-I registers, it was observed that the SS ingots and MS ingots were not accounted for therein. The laboratory records maintained by the Lab Chemist, Mohamed Ilyas revealed that molten iron had been chemically analysed on several days for a number of heats in respect of induction and arc furnace, while the resultant production in RG-I was shown as `nil'. The Lab Chemist stated that the chemical test had been performed on the molten stuff in order to achieve the desired composition in the ingots in respect of each heat of the furnace. Relevant RG-I register, Form IV register and Lab Register for the period 1-7-1984 to 30-9-1984 and 1-12-1984 and 8-8-1985 were resumed and scrutiny of the same indicated that the appellants had manufactured 350 MTs of SS ingots and 84.00 MTs of MS ingots and clandestinely cleared the same without payment of duty and without accountal in statutory records. Since the lab registers for the period prior to 1-7-1984 and for October and November 1984 could not be procured the average production of both types of ingots produced and cleared between July 1984 and June 1985 was worked out on the basis that each heat of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the period in question. Annexure I to the show cause notice which is the working sheet for duty calculation is given below :- Annexure I M/s. Muzaffarnagar Steel Ltd., Meerut Road, Mazaffarnagar Detail of production not accounted for in R.G. 1 etc. but evident from private records - Lab registers - Surprise check on 8-8-1985 (From 1-7-1984 to 30-9-84 and 1-12-1984 to 21-6-1985) S.No. Date on which Chemical Test per formed for molten metal Lab. Register Reference Sl. No./ Page No. No of heats tested for production Likely production S.S./M.S. Ingots (M.T.) Production as per R.G. 1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 3-7-1984 10/5 1 0.500 M.T. S.S. Nil 2. 4-7-1984 6/6 3 1.500 -do- -- 3. 13-7-1984 15 12 6.000 " -- 4. 14-7-1984 16 14 7.000 " -- 5. 15-7-1984 17 7 3.500 " -- 6. 16-7-1984 18 10 5.000 " -- 7. 18-8-1984 52 8 4.000 " -- 8. 19-8-1984 53 7 3.500 " -- 9. 20-8-1984 54 5 2.500 " -- 10. 20-8-1984 54 3 30.000 M.T. M.S. -- 11. 2-9-1984 67 7 3.500 M.T. S.S -- 12. 2-9-1984 67 3 30.000 M.T. M.S -- 13. 4-9-1984 69 7 3.500 M.T. S. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .500 -do- 59. 18-5-1985 32 9 4.500 -do- 60. 19-5-1985 33 8 4.000 -do- 61. 20-5-1985 34 11 5.500 -do- 62. 28-5-1985 42 12 6.000 -do- 63. 29-5-1985 43 12 6.000 -do- 64. 31-5-1985 45 9 4.500 -do- 65. 5-6-1985 5/7 12 6.000 -do- 66. 18-6-1985 20 11 5.500 -do- 67. 20-6-1985 22 12 6.000 -do- 68. 21-6-1985 23 14 7.000 M.T. S.S. S.S. ingots 78.000 M.T duty @ 315/- per M.T. Duty on 78 M.T. of S.S. = 78 x 315 = Rs. 24,570=00 Duty B/F from P.1 = Rs. 62,480=00 Total Rs. 87,050=00 Value S.S. ingots = 292 x @ 20000/- per M.T. = Rs. 58,40,000=00 Value M.S. ingots = 70 x @ 5000/- per M.T. = Rs. 3,50,000=00 61,90,000=00 214.00 MTTotal S.S. Ingots 78.00 MT 58.40 350.40 MT Total M.S. Ingots 70.00 14.00 84.00 MT Total duty 62,480.00 24,570.00 15,828.00 1,02,878.00 It is maintained in the normal course of business by the lab chemist and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sting was done and not the date on which the sample was taken. However, no weightage can be attached to this affidavit as it has been sworn to only after a period of about 41/2 years subsequent to the seizure and has been rightly rejected as an after-thought by the adjudicating authority. Further the appellants have not been able to substantiate either before the adjudicating authority or before us, their contention that the dates in the lab register are the dates of testing and not the dates on which samples were drawn and they have also not adduced any evidence as to the dates of sampling, in support of this plea. The submission that some times more than one sample is drawn from a particular heat and therefore, the number of heats does not relate to the quantity of ingots is devoid of substance as it is not supported by any evidence. 5. The case laws relied upon by the learned representative does not advance the case of the appellants, as they are distinguishable on facts. In the case of Kashmir Vanaspati P. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, reported in 1989 (39) E.L.T. 655, the Tribunal held that several of the entries in the private note book maintained by the contractor wo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t cannot be said that the calculation is based on presumptions or assumptions or averages. 6. In the light of the above discussion, we hold that the lab register is a reliable document for arriving at the quantum of ingots manufactured and removed surreptitiously. The argument that the electricity supply was not available on 60 out of 65 days mentioned in the chart as dates of production as per lab register as evidenced by a certificate dated 19-1-1989 of Shri B.R. Goyal, SDO, Electricity Distribution, Muzaffarnagar has been rightly rejected for the reasons that the certificate contains some variation of dates and is also an after-thought. The clear evidence is available only in the form of the lab register and the statement dated 8-8-1985 of the lab chemist. Similarly no credence can be given to the affidavit of the Director of the factory to the effect that the furnaces cannot run at the power load of 140 KVA as it was only meant for lights and fans and that there was no other alternate arrangements to operate the furnace, as it is a belated submission. The plea that the demand is time barred is also not sustainable in view of the finding of suppression of production with the in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
