9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (6) TMI 424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espect of goods valued at Rs. 85,305.10 seized from the godown of appellant. (iii) Imposition of redemption fine of Rs. 3,00,000/- in respect of manmade fabrics admeasuring 54,990 L. Metres valued at Rs. 7,80,797/- and cotton fabrics admeasuring 42,398 L. Metres valued at Rs. 7,03,476/-, which were seized from appellant s premises on account of their not being entered in the RG1 register. (iv) Demand for duty of Rs. 52,73,773/- in respect of processed manmade fabrics allegedly cleared in the guise of cotton fabrics by claiming exemption in terms of Notification No. 253/82-C.E., dated 8-11-1982. (v) Penalty of Rs. 10.00 lakhs on the assessee, Rs. 1.00 lakh on the Director, Rs. 25,000/- on P.M. Gohil, godown in-charge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of man-made fabrics and 42,398 L. Metres of cotton fabrics which were seized within the factory premises on account of not being entered in the RG1 register, it was submitted that it was an admitted position that the stock in question was in process and that it had not reached the RG1 stage. Appellant submits that this fact is evident from Para 3 of the impugned Order-in-Original. Appellant also submitted that even otherwise the goods in question as well as those at Sr. No. 2 above cannot be held liable for confiscation under Rule 173Q(b) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 as the same can in fact be invoked only if there is mens rea on the part of the assessee and the absence of the same goods cannot be held liable for confiscation under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... employees to the effect that the description given in the Gray Inward Register was correct. (iii) Statements given by 3 persons who supplied gray fabric to the appellant wherein they stated that, based on the prices shown in the grey invoices, they were able to confirm the correctness of the description given in the Gray Inward Register. 6. Examining the material, it is found : (a) The Gray Inward Register is maintained mainly for recording the quantity of such fabric received, the number of bales made, quantity returned without processing and the quantity transferred to the processing unit. Column No. 5 which is titled quantity was not really material for the storekeeper and, in any case, the storekeeper is not technica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment s case that the Gray Inward Register mentioned the correct description of the quality now proved to be incorrect, consequently the same could not be relied upon. (c) The statements of the Director and employees were recorded under duress and affidavits of retraction were placed before the adjudicator wherein a handwritten document containing corrections made by an investigating officer was also annexed. There is no discussion in the order on this very relevant aspect. This handwritten annexure goes to prove that the statements were not only not true but were dictated by the officers. The statements of the suppliers are also rendered unreliable in view of the testimonies of two of the suppliers who, in the course of cross-exami ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... founded. (e) When there is no material on records to be reliable to conclude that polyester or other blended fabrics which were required to discharge duty at higher rate were cleared in the guise of lesser dutiable cotton fabrics by misdeclaration of quality the entire demand fails. 7. In view of the findings, the penalty on the assessee is required to be reduced from Rs. 10.00 lakhs to Rs. 1.00 lakh, for the duty demand of Rs. 1,54,102/- not disputed. The penalty on the Director and the Manager and Office Superintendent is required to be set aside, since no goods are being held as liable to confiscation. 8. Therefore, appeal of the assessee is to be allowed partially in above terms and appeal of others viz. the Director, Mana ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
