9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (2) TMI 507X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emanufacture of their final product under Rule 57A of the CentralExcise Rules, on 29.12.97. Investigation revealed that the companywas manufacturing Oval Cans from Tin plates both imported as well aspurchased from the local market which were got printed by M/s.Divecha Glass Company, Mumbai on job work basis, after obtainingrequisite permission for sending the tin plates directly to the jobworker for printing. It was found that the required thickness of tinplates for manufacturing oval CTP cans (Colgate Tooth Powder Cans)ranged between 0.14 mm to 0.24 mm. The scrutiny of the records showedthat the company had received bare tin plates of thickness exceeding0.24 mm on which modvat credit was availed. On further investigationit appeared to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... odriguez, Director - ₹ 5 lakhs; Shri A.M. Kulkarni, Manager (Commercial) - Rs. One lakh and Shri V.B. Bindu, Plant Manager - ₹ 50,000/-. Hence these appeals. 2. We have heard both sides, and record ourfindings hereunder :- (a) Credit availed on tin plates having thickness ranging between0.26 mm to 0.31 mm. The duty demand in respect of such goods has been raised inAnnexure B.I. The officers in charge of the manufacturing unit haveclearly stated that tin plates of thickness exceeding 0.26 mm cannotbe used for their final product viz. CTP oval cans as the setting ofthe machines is not suitable for thickness exceeding 0.26 mm, andthat they are using printed tin sheets of thickness ranging from 0.18mm to 0.26 mm for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n that while the show cause notice proposedpenalty under provisions of Rule 571 (4) of the Central Excise Rulesand Sec. 11AC of the Central Excise Act, the Commissioner has invokedthe provisions of Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules for imposingpenalty and the two sets of circumstances under which theseprovisions are attracted are entirely different. (d) Penalty imposed on the officers of the company are also setaside as all 3 of them looked after the affairs of the company inAurangabad while the substitution of imported inputs is stated tohave been carried by M/s. Divecha Glass Co. at Mumbai whichestablished that these officers did not deal with the offending goodsand dealing with goods liable to confiscation has been held to be apre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
