9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 796X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a result of the same, the officers found shortages of 85 MT of duty paid scrap and 350 MT sponge iron. As the authorised signatory of the said appellant could not give reasonably explanation for the said shortages, the officers entertained a view that the final product was cleared by the appellant without payment of duty. The appellant also deposited duty of Rs.6,84,624/- on the said shortages. 3. On further search of the factory premises, the officers found triplicate copy of invoice No.010100070, dtd. 07.07.05 showing clearance of 15.80 MT of MS ingots to M/s Amba Steels, Muzaffarnagar. Another invoice carrying the same No. but dtd. 08.07.05 made in the name of same M/s Amba Steels, Muzaffarnagar was also found. Whereas clearances made v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... As regards the appeal of M/s Raman Ispat, I find that duty of Rs.6,84,624/- stands confirmed against them in respect of shortages of stock of duty paid scrap and sponge iron, detected at the time of visit of the officers. Shri Rajnish Verma, Chief Accountant in his on-the-spot statement had deposed that they take the sponge iron to the furnace by estimation only and hence shortages can be on account of faulty accounting procedure. The appellant also contested the shortages in the final product by submitting that the stock was not actually weighed but stock verification was done by putting the same in two trucks and weighing the same. However, there was no mention of truck nos., weighment slips either in the Panchnama or stock verification r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reasons to uphold confirmation of demand of Rs.6,84,624/-. 10. As regards confirmation of demand of duty of Rs.36,916/-, I find that the same is based on recovery of a parallel invoice No.70, dtd. 07.07.05 showing clearances of the goods to M/s Amba Steels. The said invoice was admittedly not entered in RG-1 register. The appellant's plea that their customer M/s Amba Steels cancelled the order and as such another invoice was issued on the subsequent date, i.e., 08.07.05, cannot be accepted in the absence of any evidence to show cancellation of the order. Even if the order was cancelled, it was obligatory on the part of the appellant to cancel invoice subsequently and intimate the deptt. accordingly. Having not done that, I am of the view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellants in terms of provisions of Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. On going through the order of Addl. Commissioner, I find that penalties stands imposed on the appellants on the sole ground that they are responsible for day-to-day work of manufacturing unit. No specific allegation stands levelled against the said appellants with the support of any evidence to show their role in clandestine clearances. In any case, the major part of the demand against M/s Raman Ispat stands set aside along with setting aside of penalty and other small portion of the demand stands confirmed along with imposition of penalty on M/s Raman Ispat. As such I find no justifiable reasons to impose separate penalties on the other three appellants. The same a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
