9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the assessee based upon the number of packing machines etc. installed in their factory. The fact of filing the late intimation about the closure of the factory, along with the fact of refusal to get the machines sealed, leads to unavoidable conclusion that the appellants factory was working right from 1.7.08 to 14.7.08, when their machines were actually put under seal on 15.7.08 - Confirmation of demand against the assessee along with interest and imposition of penalty is in accordance of provisions of Pan Masala Packaging Machine (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty), Rules, 2002 - Decided against assessee. - Appeal No. 6 of 2011 - EX[SM] - ORDER NO. FO/58698/2013-EX(SM) - Dated:- 30-12-2013 - Shri Mathew John, J. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oduction of pan masala. However, it is seen that the appellants resisted to the said sealing of the machines by the visiting officers. Subsequently the appellants on 14.7.08 again requested their Asstt. Commissioner for sealing the machines in question, which were actually sealed on 15.7.08. 3. Inasmuch the pan masala packing machines (Capacity Determination and collection of duty) Rules, 2008 came into existence with effect from 1.7.08, the appellant was required to discharge their duty liability in terms of said Rules, except where machines were sealed by the officers and no manufacturing took place during the period of sealing, the assessee was entitled to claim of abatement. Inasmuch as in the present case, the machines were sealed on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontention that since they were not working from the date of issue of show cause notice, no demand can be made from them under the said Rules.. 6. The facts are not much in dispute, it is seen that after coming into existence of the said Rules, the appellants for the first time wrote to the Revenue on 7.7.08 that they had stopped production with effect from 1.7.08 and had not manufactured the specified goods subsequent to 1.7.08. Said letter dated 7.7.08 was received by the Assistant Commissioner on 9.7.08. On receipt of such letter, the jurisdictional Central Excise officer visited the appellants factory for the purpose of sealing of the machines. As per the report of the appellants jurisdictional Central Excise Superintendent , the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es were actually put under seal on 15.7.08. Apart from the bald submissions, that their factory was not in working condition from 1.7.08 onwards there is virtually no evidence on record to substantiate the above stand of the appellants. On the other hand filing of late intimation and the appellants resistance to the sealing of the machines are clear indicative of the fact that during the said period, the appellants were actually manufacturing their final products. As such, I am of the view that confirmation of demand against the assessee along with interest and imposition of penalty is in accordance of provisions of Pan Masala Packaging Machine (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty), Rules, 2002. Accordingly, the impugned orders ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
