9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 250X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Original No. 13-14/ 2013/ C dtd. 21/102013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs and Service Tax, Nagpur. By the said order the Ld. Adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of duty and penalty as detailed in the below chart:- Sr No. Appeal No. Custom Duty involved Penalty involved C.E.Duty involved C.E. Penalty involved 1 E/86981/14-MUM 6,32,235/- 6,32,235/- 16,52,841/- 16,52,841/- 2 E/85397/14-MUM 6,32,235/- 16,52,641/- 3 C/86140/14-MUM 6,32,253/- 4 C/85396/14-MUM 6,32,235/- 6,32,235/- 16,52,841/- 16,52,841/- Aggrieved by the aforesaid order the appellant filed these appeals alongwith stay applications. 2. When the matter was called for hea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re destroyed. The appellant maintained a stand that whatsoever quantity of waste paper destroyed it is of indigenous material therefore there is no any excise duty or custom duty exist. The department after scrutiny of records recording statement of various persons contended in the show cause notice that quantity destroyed is nothing but imported material which was imported during the month of April 2008 by availing the benefit of exemption under notification No. 21/2008-Cus dated 1/3/2008 which resulted the demand of custom duty as well as denial of Cenvat Credit availed in respect of CVD. In the first round of adjudication the demand of custom duty as well as excise duty and corresponding penalties were imposed and personal penalties of e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he records available, therefore it is established that fire loss material is of imported one and not of indigenous, hence confirmed the entire demand of custom duty as well as excise duty and penalty once again in the impugned denovo order. Aggrieved by the said order the applicant is before us with the present stay applications. 4. Shri. M. S. Ramteke, Manager(Finance) of the appellant company was present. 5. Shri. N.N. Prabhudesai, Ld. Superintendent (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that appellants were given sufficient opportunity not only before the adjudicating authority but also in the remand matter by this Tribunal in the first round of litigation, however applicant could not satisfy that the goods which lost in fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at was destroyed was only imported waste paper and not indigenous waste paper. Therefore, there is a lacuna in the impugned order. 8.2. On the other hand, contention of the appellant that as per the Surveyors report what was destroyed is only indigenous waste paper, can also not be accepted. If loss was taken on the basis of indigenous waste paper, the loss would be less when compared to the loss estimated on the basis of imported waste paper. Thus, the surveyor of the Insurance Company has an interest in minimizing the loss because the insurance company would like to give less compensation. Therefore, it cannot be said that what is stated in the Surveyors report can be blindly accepted. 8.3 The appellant was also at fault in not inti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e observations and direction based thereupon the applicants were given sufficient opportunity to justify their claim that goods lost in fire is indigenous goods. However, applicant neither submitted any record nor explained their claim before the adjudicating authority during the denovo adjudication. Moreover there was serious manipulation appearing on records that the applicants were maintaining two parallel Form IV register and the stock shown in both the register and entries of imported goods were also wrongly made. In the remand matter this Tribunal has categorically stated to follow the FIFO principle, however applicant has not done anything to comply with the direction of the Tribunal. In view of this position it is clear that the ent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
