9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (12) TMI 279X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hese are goods relating to their trading activity, Central Excise Preventive Officers visited their factory on 5-8-1986. A scrutiny of their records showed that they were maintaining a private record on shift-wise production Register in which the production was being recorded and a comparison of the entries therein with the statutory register of production R.G. 1 showed that the production shown in the shift register was not recorded in R.G. 1 Register. It was further revealed that the appellant had cleared certain types of Electric Wires and Cables from their factory without payment of duty during the period from April, 1984 to July, 1986. The statement was recorded Shri Subhash T. Agarwal who gave the names of the parties from whom they ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... res and cables said to have been purchased as a part of the trading activity, and supplied to Gujarat Electricity Board were not actually from the trading activity but it was comouflage to cover up suppressed production; charge of violation of the procedure under the Central Excise Rules was also made in their proceedings. Show cause notice was issued on 1-6-1988 charging the appellant firm, as well as proprietor Shri Tarachand Agarwal, and the person incharge Shri Subhash Agrawal for demanding duty and imposition of penalty. On considering their reply and hearing them in the matter, the impugned order was passed by which a duty amount of Rs. 6,64,316/- was demanded from the appellant M/s. Agarwal Electricals; penalty of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rup ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tinely removed. He referred to in the reasons contained in the impugned order. If the duty paying goods had been received by the appellants, who are themselves manufacturers under the Central Excise then they ought to have followed the detailed procedure prescribed under Rule 173H, which they have failed to do. In reply the ld. consultant submitted that the wires and cables from other factory were not received in their factory, but in another factory by name Agarwal Industries. 4. We have carefully considered the submission made both sides. The Department s case for duty demand among other things is based on the entries in their shift register and the entries therein were being maintained by the person incharge and the regularity with whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
