9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (7) TMI 424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se for consideration are that the authorities during the visit of the factory of the appellant resumed records for scrutiny. The authorities referred the invoices issued by the appellants to the Trade Tax Officer on the border of Saharanpur. The report of the Trade tax Officer varied as regard the value on the invoices. On doubting the veracity of invoices, the officers, further, scrutinized and found that the value as shown by the appellant on the invoices which were issued from their record were on very lower side while the invoice value as recorded by Trade Tax Authorities were on a very higher side. On further investigation, the authorities found that the appellants had cleared the goods to one M/s. K.K. Rubber Products on parallel invo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2004 (165) E.L.T. 508 (Kar.) = 2004 (61) RLT 17 (Kar.) Learned D.R. on the other hand submits that the issue of Clandestine removal and demand of duty has been proved in this case by the recovery of the invoice to M/s. K.K. Rubber (P) Ltd. which indicated the existence of parallel invoice book. It is his submission that since under valuation and clandestine removal is proved there cannot be any question of setting aside the penalties imposed on the appellants. 4. Considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the record. It is on record that the Trade Tax authorities in their report indicated the registering of 3 invoices issued by the appellant which passed out of the check post. The value shown on those invoices totally vary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demand of duty on the appellant is liable to be upheld and I do so. 5. As regard penalties imposed on the appellants, I find that the appellants had deposited the entire amount of duty on 29-5-2000 and 23-4-2001 whereas the show cause notice was issued to the appellants on 22-10-2002. I find force in the appellants contention that the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Gaurav Mercantile squarely covers the issue in their favour. Respectfully following the decision the penalties imposed on the appellants under Section 11AC is liable to be set aside, and I do so. As regards penalties on the appellants under Rule 173Q, I find that the penalties has been imposed on the appellants without mentioning the specific Sub- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
