9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 665X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e quantum of demand of duty of ₹ 1,08,98,297/- and equal amount of penalty, followed by interest against duty demand on the appellant company, we direct the appellant M/s. Shree Nakoda Ispat Ltd. to deposit ₹ 70 lakhs ( adjusting any amount if paid prior to this order) within six week. So far as the appellant Sri Anant Dave, Director of appellant company is concerned, he has faced penalty of ₹ 20 lakhs. We do appreciate that without human intervention a corporate solo does not function. Directors are regulator of business of the company. For breach of law and evasion, they are answerable to law. Therefore Sri Anant Dave is to make deposit ₹ 10 lakhs within six weeks So far as appellant Sri Sanjay Goel, Director is concerned, he has faced penalty of ₹ 20 lakhs. Prima facie, nothing has been brought to our notice about active involvement by this appellant. So this director is not directed to make any pre-deposit of penalty at this stage. So far as appellant Sri Kailash Agarwal, agent is concerned, we have already passed an order against this appellant appreciating his role in evasion. Keeping that in view and maintaining consistency, we are of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... port. 4. Allegation against the company was that records produced by the appellant company before investigation revealed that 1416.01 MT sponge iron, 2681.200 MT of MS ingots and MS Billets were clandestinely removed from the factory of the appellant with the involvement of Shree Bajarang Transport and Kailash Agarwal. This is a mere allegation without any basis. Bajrang Transporter was no doubt transporting the goods of the appellant but had also played mischief against the appellant in respect of the invoices mentioned in para 2.1 (c) of the adjudication order at page 4 thereof (Ref: internal page 34 of the appeal folder) against such mischief, an FIR was also filed against Shree Bajrang Transport. Investigation made on 28.8.2007 resulted with the allegation that appellant companys involvement was in clandestine removal ignoring the mischief played by Shree Bajrang Transport. 5. According to appellant company and its Directors, Revenue did not allow any cross examination of Shree Bajrang Transport while evidence of that transporter was used against the appellant company. Relying on the decision of Honble High Court of Allahabad in the case of CCE, Meerut-I vs. Parmarth Iron ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt did not appear. Therefore there cannot be allegation of denial of cross examination. Revenue further submitted that reliance placed on the citation by appellant on cross examination shall be of no avail. Specific reference to page 181 to 181 of the impugned order was made to show modus operandi of the appellant, sequentially proving how appellant acted in connivance with Shri Bajrang transport to make series of clandestine clearances. Annexure K to the show cause notice appearing at page 186 of appeal folder brought out that the goods transported by Sri Bajrang belonged to the appellant. Those goods were duty escaped goods. 10. Placing reliance on page 43 of the paper book, it was submitted by Revenue that the evidence of Shree Bajarang Transport clearly brought out the case of clandestine removal against the appellant. Further, placing reliance on para 6.3 at page 47 of the appeal folder, it was brought out that the appellant had no evidence to deny transportation of clandestinely removal goods of the appellant company by Shree Bajrang Transport when records of Shree Bajrang Transport revealed such transportation and that record was not disowned. That brought out an integral ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tries that self explained the oblique motive of appellant and their questionable modus operandi. All entries in the Register of Shree Bajrang Transport were within the exclusive knowledge of the appellant. At this Prima facie stage, it has become difficult to rule out credibility of evidence gathered by investigation and used against the appellant. 16. Enquiry was made into various statements recorded by Revenue. Statement of Sri Anant Dave shows that Revenue was misled by him to reach to its conclusion. Similarly statement recorded from Shree Bajrang Transport shows premeditated design by these appellants against Revenue. 17. Considering the quantum of demand of duty of ₹ 1,08,98,297/- and equal amount of penalty, followed by interest against duty demand on the appellant company, we direct the appellant M/s. Shree Nakoda Ispat Ltd. to deposit ₹ 70 lakhs ( adjusting any amount if paid prior to this order) within six weeks from today and make compliance on 06.03.2014. 18. Subject to compliance to the above direction, there shall be waiver of pre-deposit of balance amount of duty of ₹ 38,98,297/-, penalty of ₹ 1,08,98,297/- and interest during pendenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
