9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 776X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le value of the impugned goods was received in the guise of transport charges. It is also noticed that the adjudicating authority has duly allowed the SSI exemption benefit under Notification No. 8/2003 and also cum-duty benefit while confirming the demand. The suppression of facts and malafide intention of the appellants to evade payment of duty is established beyond doubt, therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the Commissioner (Appeals) order in so far as confirming the duty of ₹ 1,98,830/- and imposition of equivalent penalty on M/s. Senthil Oxygen Pvt. Ltd. and the impugned order is liable to be upeld to this extent. As regards penalty imposed on Directors of Company - Held that:- department has not issued any n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with interest and proposing imposition of penalties. The adjudicating authority in his OIO No. 68/2005 dated 29.11.2005 confirmed the duty demand of ₹ 1,98,830/- and appropriated the same and imposed equal penalty on the appellants under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and demanded interest under Section 11AB of the Act. The adjudicating authority also imposed a penalty of ₹ 50,000/- on Shri J. Senthil Kumar, Managing Director and ₹ 25,000/- on Shri G. Gopalakrishna Unnithan, Manager Sales, of the appellant company. Aggrieved by this order the appellants filed appeal and the Commissioner (Appeals) in his OIA dated 29.06.2006 upheld the order of the adjudicating authority and rejected the appeals. Hence, the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral excise duty. He further submits that the Managing Director in his voluntary statement has clearly admitted the clearance of the goods without payment of duty and the Manager (Sales) in his voluntary statement clearly admitted suppression of production and non accountal of industrial oxygen in the books of accounts and subsequent removal of oxygen without invoices. The data retrieved from the computer CPU seized from the appellant company clearly established the total production and clearance of goods including the goods cleared without payment of duty. He also submits that the statement recorded from the Managing Director and Manager (Sales) were not retracted at any point of time. 7. Heard both the sides and on careful perusal of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd that the Commissioner (Appeals) in his impugned order while rejecting the appeals of both the appellants has not brought out any findings for imposition of penalty. It is well settled law that before imposing any penalty on any person, issue of show cause notice is mandatory and he should be given opportunity to explain his case and in the present case the principle of natural justice has not been complied nor the adjudicating authority has given any hearing to the individuals before adjudication. Therefore, the penalty imposed on both of them are liable to be set aside. 9. Accordingly, appeal filed by M/s. Senthil Oxygen Pvt. Ltd. is rejected and the impugned order is upheld. The appeals filed by Shri J. Senthil Kumar, Managing Direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
