9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 489X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other chemicals falling under various Chapters of the Central Excise Tariff. Most of these goods are sold under the brand name LOCTITE. They also import similar goods from their sister concerns abroad for trading in the Indian Market. Investigation was carried out the Central Excise Department at Pune about the activities carried out by the appellant. It was noticed that the appellant were selling these goods in retail packs through dealers/distributors and were also declaring Maximum retail Price (MRP) on the goods but they were discharging duty liability on the goods on the transaction value of the goods under section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (Act in short) even though the goods were notified for the purposes of assessment under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oducts though dealers/distributors and were also declaring MRP on such retail packages. It was also noticed that the appellant had started discharging duty liability on the manufactured goods on MRP basis under section 4A with effect from 15-5-2008 onwards. As regards imported goods, the appellant cleared the same through customs by paying CVD on transaction value basis by declaring that the goods were meant for captive use. The imported goods were brought into their factory for re-labelling/affixing MRPs and thereafter sold in the Indian Market through dealers/distributors. Since the goods were specified in the third Schedule to the Central Excise Act and in respect of the goods specified packing, re-packing, labeling or adoption of any ot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant made the following submissions:- (1) As against the duty demand of Rs.5.6 crore, the appellant at the investigation stage has already paid a sum of Rs. 83,59,372/- (Rs. 46,59,372/- towards manufactured goods plus Rs. 37 lakhs towards imported traded goods). The appellant would be eligible for cenvat credit of Rs.1,75,97,428/- towards the CVD+SAD paid on the imported goods. An amount of Rs. 55,13,420/- pertains to the demand in respect of goods not covered by the Third Schedule to the Central Excise Act and therefore, demand to this extent would not be sustainable. If these are taken into account, the appellant would have discharged about 60% of the demand confirmed and the same be considered sufficient for the grant of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urukripa Enterprises, distributor of the appellant firm shows that the appellant had sold the imported goods in retail packages and the same had labels affixed by the appellant indicating the MRP from 2006 onwards. These statements clearly establish the willful mis-statement and suppression on the part of the appellant to evade duty liability. Therefore, the extended period of time has been rightly invoked and therefore, he pleads that the appellant be put to terms. 5. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. 5.1 As regards the goods manufactured by the appellant, it is an admitted position that for the period with effect from 15-5-2008 onwards, they have discharged excise duty liability under section 4A of the Act without any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment dated 29-7-2010 of Sri. Raghunath Bhau Shinde, Manager of the CHA firm. Further from the statements of the Logistics Assistant Sri. Praveen Sonar, it is evident that the imported traded goods were in retail packages and the appellant had undertaken the activity of re-labeling in the appellant's factory even during the period 13-1-2007 to 14-5-2008. From the statements dated 19-7-2010 of Shri. K. Raghuram, Sales Manager of Cutmac Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Chennai, Shri. J. Alexander, Business Development Executive of Saroj Enterprises, Coimbatore, Sri, Suresh Gupta of Micro Sales Corp., Mumbai, Sri. Arun Agarwal of M/s. Jay Kay Enterprises, Goa and Smt. Sandhya Raghavendran of Gurukrupa Enterprises, Bangalore, all distributors of the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sposal of the appeal. 5.3 The appellant has not pleaded any financial hardship nor any evidence in this regard is placed before us. The Hon'ble AP high Court in the case of SQL Star International ltd. laid down the principles to be kept in mind while considering the applications for stay or for disposing with the requirement of pre-deposit: "1) Three aspects to be focused while dealing with the applications for dispensing of pre-deposit are: (a) prima facie case, (b) balance of convenience, and (c) irreparable loss; 2) Interim orders ought not to be granted merely because a prima facie case has been shown; 3) The balance of convenience must be clearly in favour o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
