9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (12) TMI 287X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rmation supplied by them, the Revenue proceeded to recover duty from them on the alleged removal of the molasses from katcha pits . However on the basis of the Order-in-Original and the contention raised by the assessee, the Commissioner (Appeals) has found that the Revenue did not produce any evidence of removal of diluted and damaged molasses which quantity is 326.410 MT lying in the open pits. The findings recorded in Paragraphs 6 to 12 of the impugned order are reproduced herein below :- 6. I have carefully examined the issue. The short point to be decided is the sustainability of the impugned order on the grounds on which the demand is confirmed, in light of statutory provisions vis-a-vis facts. 7. The entire proceedings have bro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 22-6-2001 wherein the appellant has committed that duty shall be discharged on the clearance of disputed quantity of molasses stored in the pit, and that buyers had been identified. I find from the records that the appellant has informed the Department that the disputed quantity has been pumped into the Tanks from the storage Pits, vide their letter dated 12-9-2001. This resulted in diluted molasses arising from mixing of the molasses pumped from the pits into the storage tanks with the better quality molasses stored directly in the tanks. Subsequently, the appellant has submitted a letter dated 1-11-2002 to the Department, showing invoice-wise particulars of clearances of molasses made from the tanks on payment of duty between 14-9-20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imagination is not legally sustainable. 11. The allegations in the show cause notice refer to violation of Central Excise Rules, 2002, which came into operation with effect from 1-3-2002. The Rules in vogue during the material period are those notified under Notification No. 30/2001-CE (NT) dated 21-6-2001. However, wrong citation does not take away the validity of the allegation as held in a number of judgments; and the Rule Numbers in both cases contain the same text. The SCN alleged violation of Rule 4, which requires clearance to be made on payment of duty in the manner laid out in rule 8, which again is made applicable to clearances out of the factory. There is nothing to evidence the clearance of the disputed quantity outside the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as admitted by him before the lower authority during the adjudication proceedings. 12. In summary, therefore, I find that the demand for duty and attendant interest in the impugned order is not legally sustainable. The corresponding portions of the impugned order is set aside. However, I find that Rule 10 of the said Rules has been violated, although no mens rea is evidenced, justifying a minimum penalty under Rule 25. The penalty imposed is upheld. 2. The Revenue s contention in this appeal is that as the appellants had shown excess stock in RG 1 Register, they arrived at the conclusion that there was clandestine removal of diluted and damaged molasses. The learned JDR took me through the Grounds of the Appeal and the Order-in-Orig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
