9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 61X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... without payment of duty - Decided against assessee. - E/13334/2013, E/13156/2013, E/13157/2013, E/13158/2013, E/13159/2013, E/13222/2013, E/13223/2013, E/13224/2013, E/13254/2013, E/13129/2013, E/13130/2013, E/13131/2013, E/13132/2013, E/13143/2013 - Order No. M/10235-10248/2014 - Dated:- 16-1-2014 - MR.M.V. RAVINDRAN AND MR. H.K. THAKUR, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Manish Pushkarna, Shri V.M. Doiphode, Shri Samir Kale, Shri Anand Nainawati, Shri S.P. Mathew, Shri V.M. Doiphode, Shri Ajay Singh, Shri Manish Pushkarna For the Respondent : Shri S.K. Mall, Addl. Commissioner (A.R.) JUDGEMENT Per: M.V. Ravindran 1. This order disposes all the Stay Petitions filed for waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts involved, as the issues are inter-connected and arise out of the same Order-in-Original, they are being disposed of by a common order. 2. The adjudicating authority in a common adjudication order has confirmed the duty liability with interest on M/s Yogesh Associates (hereinafter referred to as main appellant ), suppliers of laminations/perfumes/ sacks, job workers and individuals are visited with penalties under the provisions of Central Excise Rules, 2002, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were received by them and cleared. He would also draw our attention to the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Vishwa Traders Pvt.Ltd. Vs. CCE Vadodara - 2012 (278) ELT 362 (Tri-Ahmd) and submit that an identical issue was before their Lordships and they have held that the demands cannot be raised unless there is a clandestine manufacture. He would submit that the adjudicating authority has miserably failed in bringing on record that there was clandestine manufacture. 5. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the supplier of sacks and perfumes would submit that the role attributed to their clients is totally unacceptable in as much as they had manufactured the dutiable goods, cleared the same on payment of duty. It is their submission that the duty liability which has been discharged by them is not disputed by the Revenue but the penalties have been imposed only on the ground that both the appellants had cleared the sacks and perfumes on invoice on which the consignee s name is not properly indicated and/or other consignee is non-existent. It is his submission that they have sold the goods to any person who comes to the factory gate and it is their business polic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice on them, after they were informed that the adjudicating authority is taking up this matter for adjudication for which there was no response from the authorities. It is his submission that in the absence of any show cause notice or defence reply, the adjudicating authority has merely proceeded on the basis of interim reply given by the appellant based upon the show cause notices issued to other noticees and the employees of this company, is gross violation of principles of natural justice. 8. Ld.Counsel appearing on behalf of various individuals and individuals who are unrepresented before us, on perusal of the records, we find that all the individuals are contesting imposition of penalties on them on various grounds and one of them being unnecessarily penalized as they have done nothing wrong to attract penalty under Rule 26(1) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 9. Ld. Additional Commissioner (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue would take us through the Order-in-Original and he would read it. It is his submission that the entire issue/investigations started with the interception of a vehicle which had 75 sacks of Gutkha without any duty paying documents/clearance document ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the statement, is a question of facts which needs detailed verification. We find that the adjudicating authority has confirmed the demand by working back the quantity manufactured by the main appellant based upon the statements given by the lamination manufacturers. In our prima facie view, this could be a presumptuous way of coming to a conclusion that there was clandestine manufacture and clearance of Gutkha, in as much as we find that there are few evidences which would indicate that the other inputs which were required for manufacturing of Gutkha was also procured were unaccounted. Ld.Counsel had submitted that the main appellant had severe financial hardships and produces a copy of balance sheet as for the year ending 31.03.2011. On perusal of the said balance sheet, we find that the said balance sheet is for the year ending 31.03.2011 and subsequent balance sheets are not produced before us and hence the claim of financial hardships is only on thin air. In our view, the entire voluminous records which have been produced before us needs to be considered in detail, which can be done only at the time of final disposal of the appeals. At this juncture, prima facie, we find tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
