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

2001 (9) TMI 618

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ril 99 under Rule 9(2) of Central Excise Rules, read with proviso to Section 11A(1) of Central Excise Act. There is a penalty of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- under various provisions of Central Excise Rules has been imposed besides penalty of Rs. 3,26,43,956/- under Section 11AC of C.E. Act. There is an order of confiscation of land, building etc. However, the same was ordered to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 25 lakhs. On two individuals namely Shri P. Venkateswarulu, Managing Director, Shri J.S.R. Prasad, Executive Director penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs each has been imposed. 2. Appellants are manufacturers of cement and had obtained exemption in terms of notification No. 5/94 dated 1-3-94 and subsequent notification granting concessional rate of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Govt. of Andhra Pradesh had constituted a three Member Committee to examine the grant of certificate under the notification by the Director of Industries and to specifically look into the allegation of fraud, mis-declaration, mis-information in getting the certificate. The three member committee, after examination in respect of certificates issued to several cement factory, absolved the appellants and others and the report was in favour of the appellants inasmuch as that there was no mis-declaration or false information and the said certificate issued by the department was in order. (c) That the department cannot proceed against them in view of the fact that the certificate is binding on the authorities and Commissioner can not p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he show cause notice and therefore the order is vitiated. (g) It is also pleaded that revenue initiated proceedings on the basis of initial statement of the Asst. Director of Industries, Andhra Pradesh, namely, Shri Raja Reddy. However all the witnesses had clarified in their cross examination that appellants have not misled or committed any fraud in obtaining the certificate. It is pleaded that this portion of the evidence has not been considered and looked into and reliance has been placed on the initial statement which does not have any force and looses its validity in the light of clarification given by the witnesses in their cross examination. He therefore submitted that the order passed by the Commissioner solely on the basis of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... order be granted to the extent they have raised the ground and with specific direction to the Commissioner to confine his proceedings to the parameters of the show cause notice and also to take into consideration their evidence more particularly the clarification given by the supplier and the statement given by the witnesses in their cross examination. It was also argued that the Commissioner is bound by the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Deccan Cements Ltd (supra) and the Tribunal has already given a direction in the remand order subsequently passed as noted above (Final Order No. 1287 to 1293/2001 dated 2-8-2001) giving directions to the Commissioner to apply the ratio of the judgments on this issue. 6. Ld. Senior Counsel also .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and the case of My Home Cement Industries (supra) setting aside the order and remanding the same. Therefore, we are taking up these appeals for final decision. As already we have remanded the matters in similar proceedings, we are of the considered opinion that in the present case also there are number of infirmities as pointed out by the ld. Senior Counsel, therefore the matter requires to be remanded back for de novo consideration. We have considered the submission that the ld. Commissioner has proceeded beyond the terms of the show cause notice in relying upon the NCCB report which was in respect of Dhar Cements. We agree with the ld. Senior Counsel s submission that de novo proceedings have to be within the parameters of the case made .....

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