9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (11) TMI 482X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4 dated 22-6-2004. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, as seen from the records are as follows : - (i) On the date of visit by officers on 12-6-1996 and verification of stock of raw materials, it was revealed that stock available as per book was 78,949 kgs as against the actual stock of 29,375 kgs. of raw material falling under Chapter 29. (ii) The Manager and the Director admitted to the clearance of materials without preparing the excise invoices from the one unit to another unit. (iii) The department issued show cause notice for demanding duty to the tune of Rs. 3,26,206/- for the period from Nov. 94 to March, 96 and the same confirmed by the adjudicating authority, he has also imposed pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant, he relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Impression Prints v. CCE, Delhi-I reported in 2005 (187) E.L.T. 170 (S.C.). 7. I have carefully considered the rivals submissions. The appellant s prayer in the earlier round of litigation of the Tribunal was regarding considering the certificate of Professor of Mumbai University about the losses. I find that this has been carefully considered by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the reasons have been recorded. Further. I find that the show cause notice specify month wise removals attributed to the appellant company and the same has not been effectively countered by them. Therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) on this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case of M/s Elgi Equipments Ltd. the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court is to the effect that Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is prospective in operation and illegality committed prior to insertion of Section 11AC in the Act, cannot be the subject matter of penalty under the said provision. Therefore, I hold that penalty under Section 11AC is not attracted. 11. However, I find that this is clear and admitted case of removal of the duty paid inputs on which credit had been taken to theirs another unit without paying the appropriate duty. Taking the entire facts of the case into account, I reduce the penalty to Rs. 30,000/- 12. The appeal is partly allowed in the above terms. (Dictated and pronounced in Court) - - T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
