Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1997 (12) TMI 321

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rough blocks but not polished granite slabs. But after being shown the register F-10 (Sl. No. 7 of Annexure V), accepted that polished granite slabs were sold in the DTA and he regretted for the mistake made in the earlier part of his statement. Shri M. Hari Raju has wilfully misdeclared the facts regarding the sale of polished granite slabs, in order to mislead the officers conducting the investigation. Shri M. Hari Raju also wrote in his own hand certain accounts relating to the sale of polished granite slabs in the DTA, in files/registers/R/31, R/32 R/39, in the capacity of the Finance Manager of NCEL. This clearly indicates that Shri Hari Raju had a clear knowledge of the sales of polished granite slabs into the DTA and is concerned i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ve not maintained daily stock account, cleared goods to DTA without payment of duty and without issuing of gate pass. Therefore, M/s. NCEL are liable for penalty under Rule 209/226 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 3. The ld. representative of the appellant has pleaded that the appellant has been penalised for the reason that he was concerned with the removal of the Polished granite slabs clandestinely, its transport and the receipt of the sale proceeds in regard to the same. The penalty is levied under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules. The ld. representative has pleaded that Section 209A, which we have reproduced below, can be invoked where the person who is concerned in any one of the activities i.e. transporting, removing, deposi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aded that he is not implicated by any other person that he with the knowledge that the goods were not duty paid had either removed them or had done with reference to that goods as per the activities which fell within the purview of Rule 209A. He has pleaded that he was posted in the Head office which is 30 Kms away from the factory. 7. The fact that he had received the sale proceeds being finance person in the company cannot in any way implicate in the matter of removal or sale of the goods. He has pleaded nothing has been shown that he was involved in the manufacture and sale of the goods in question or he was concerned with the transactions relating to the goods which were cleared without payment of duty. He also cited the decision of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... had received amounts which represented the sale proceeds of the goods. He, therefore, would have known about the removals to the DTA. He has pleaded that he had put his signature on some of the entries relating to the slabs and therefore he has pleaded that the appellant had earlier worked in the Mines and knew what is rough slab and what is polished granite slabs and his attempt to identify the rough slabs as polished slabs in the entries in the register would show that his guilty intent. In view of the above circumstances, the ld. JDR pleaded that penalty levied is not high and he has pleaded that the case law cited will not apply to the facts of this case as in that case, the issue was wrong availment of exemption notification and clear .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r being concerned in transporting, removing, depositing, keeping, concealing, selling or purchasing or in any other manner dealing with any excisable goods which he has reason to believe are liable to confiscation. It has to be therefore brought out that the activity done by the person in charge was done when he knew or had reason to believe the goods were liable to confiscation. In this case, the knowledge about the appellants or the circumstances by which it could be read he had reason to believe that the goods were liable to confiscation are not shown to be there. In the present case, there is no attribution that the appellant was concerned with any one of the activities as set out under Rule 209A. Nobody has implicated him in respect of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates