9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1265X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Company. He confirmed that they have received the goods only under the cover of delivery challans and Bills. He produced the Xerox copies of delivery challans and bills to the investigating officer. It is noted that all statements are mostly similar in nature. - there is no material available on record that the Appellants had knowledge of the non-duty paid character of the goods. It is seen from the records that the Appellant as per the normal trade practice, purchased the goods with bills and challans from the said company. In view of that, we find that the imposition of penalty under Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules, 1944 on the Appellants/Traders cannot be sustained. It is seen that the Appellant in his statements dt.08.06.2001 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rious traders without payment of Central Excise duty. By the impugned Adjudication order, the Commissioner of C.Ex Customs, Surat-II confirmed the demand of duty of ₹ 91,99,802.00 alongwith interest and imposed penalty of equal amount of duty on the said Company (M/s Navpad Textile Industries Ltd.) It has also imposed penalties on the various traders ranging from ₹ 5,000.00 to ₹ 1,60,000.00, a penalty of ₹ 23 lakhs imposed on the Director of M/s Navpad Textile Industries Ltd, who are Appellants herein. The Tribunal by Stay Order No.S/1313 to 1329/WZB/AHD/2007, dt.27.11.2007 directed the said Company to pre-deposit a sum of ₹ 50 lakhs for hearing appeal and waived the pre-deposit of penalties on other applican ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sal of the Adjudication order, we find that the Appellants had purchased the goods on the basis of challans and bills issued by the said company. The learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue drew the attention of the Bench to Para 74 of the impugned order. It is observed by the Adjudicating authority that the Appellant received the finished goods from the said Company under the cover of delivery challans/bills without the cover of Central Excise invoices and without payment of duty. They also confirmed that the invoices issued in the name of their Company were forged/parallel invoices. The learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the Appellants strongly opposed the findings of the Commissioner. It is submitted that there is no mate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he criteria that the person dealt with the excisable goods with the knowledge or belief that the goods liable to confiscation, is required to be satisfied. We find absence of such evidence on record. There is nothing either in the statements of the accused persons or any other independent evidence reflecting any knowledge on the part of these two appellants to show that they were aware of the fact that M/s. Anu Textiles Mills Pvt. Ltd., was clearing the fabrics without payment of duty, neither has it been shown to us that the said appellants was beneficiary of the clandestine activities of the processor. In the absence of such evidence, we are of the view that penalties imposed upon the said two appellants cannot be upheld. Accordingly, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
