9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 472X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. For the purpose of hearing this appeal appellant is required to pre-deposit duty of Rs. 80,83,251/- and penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs. The allegation against the appellants are that they are manufacturers of relays and parts thereof falling under Chapter 85 of the First Schedule of the CETA and were availing CENVAT credit also. They cleared relays and parts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 certificates. It was further observed from the records of the appellant that they had cleared relays in excess of the quantity referred in the two CT-3 certificates without payment of duty. They had cleared 14,77,995 nos. of relays valued at Rs. 5,06,24,720/- during the period from August, 2002 to July, 2003 up to 28-7-2003 without the cover of CT-3 and without payment of duty to a tune of Rs. 8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellants and has given clear cut findings. He has also noted that the issue of clearance without the CT-3 certificate is a substantive violation and such a violation has been considered by the Tribunal in the case of Ratangiri Textiles Ltd v. CCE, Jaipur [2000 (119) E.L.T. 733]. He has found the citation to be fully applicable to the facts of the case. 2. We have heard in detail. Ld. Advoca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts. It was also countered by the SDR by pointing out that in terms of the rules cited by the Commissioner there is a clear violation and appellants do not have a strong case on merits. 5. On a careful consideration and on perusal of the entire order we notice that the appellants had cleared excess numbers of relays than the ones declared in the CT-3 certificate. They had also cleared the goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
