9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 985X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the raw material-mix to the three unregistered premises. In the three premises, by installing 12 machines illegally, gutka has been packed and sold bearing the brand name Paheli. On the basis of the evidences produced by Revenue, the case is fairly established. It is settled proposition that in quasi judicial proceedings, the level of evidence required to be produced is to be such that the case is established to the extent of preponderance of probability. The standard of proof need not be as required in the case of judicial proceedings. In the facts and circumstances of the case, Shri Mukesh Katheil has carried out manufacture of gutka using 12 packing machines in illegal factories - demand upheld. Penalties of ₹ 10 lakhs each on various persons - Held that: - all the persons have played an important part in abetting the clandestine manufacture of gutka in the illegal factories. They were all employees of Shri Mukesh Katheil and have worked in various capacities and have facilitated the huge evasion of Central Excise duty. Consequently, they are liable for penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - penalties upheld. Appeal dismissed. - Appeal No. E/500 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty of cross-examination was provided to the appellant of these persons. On the basis of the statement of these persons, the case has been made out for clandestine removal. He also submits that in the illegal factory there were other brand items Paheli brand gutkha. He accepted that the finished product i.e pouches under the Paheli brand gutkha, the registration number of the appellant was mentioned. It is the submission of the ld. Counsel that the duplicate gutkha was manufactured in the illegal premises and his client has nothing to do with the same. He accepted that in the three premises, there were 12 machines, no raw material was found only finished goods were found. It is the submission of the ld. Counsel that the owner s statement was not recorded. Transportation aspect was also not examined by the department. He also submits that the cross examination of certain persons were in fact conducted by the authorities below but the same was never brought on record. 4. Ld. Counsel also submits that the FIR was lodged to the police on 21.7.2008, where it is stated that duplicate pouches are prepared illegally somewhere. But fact remains that search was also conducted on 23.7.2008 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at Shri Mukesh Katheil, proprietor of M/s Shree Swaroop Products, Harpalpur, filed a declaration under Rule 6 of the Packing Machine Rules and declared one single track packing machine. He filed an intimation for closure of his factory in the month of July 2008. But during the course of search operations, carried out by the departmental officers on 23.7.2008, it was found that gutka was being manufactured by using a total of 12 packing machines in three different premises which were not declared to the department. The packing material as well as packed material found during search in these three undeclared premises indicated that the goods were being packed in pouches bearing the brand name of Paheli and bearing registration number of Shri Mukesh Katheil. After completion of investigation, show cause notices have been issued and the impugned order has been passed in which Central Excise duty of ₹ 1.5 crores has been demanded from Shri Mukesh Katheil along with interest and penalties of equal amount. The findings in the impugned order have been challenged by the present set of appeals filed by Shri Mukesh Katheil as well as other persons to whom penalties have been imposed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of reply to the show cause notice. Only in such reply, the contents of the statements have been sought to be disowned. This can only be considered as an afterthought. During the course of search, packing material as well as packed pouches were found bearing the brand name of Paheli belonging to Shri Mukesh Katheil. This further supports the statements made by three persons above. Further, various workers who were found working in the three undeclared premises, in their independent statements have also confirmed the above fact. They have further stated that the raw material mix which was used for packing gutka using the pouch packing machines were received in the unregistered premises from the registered factory of Shri Mukesh Katheil. 12. During the course of search, it was found that in addition to the registered premises, the adjacent premises were also in possession of Shri Mukesh Katheil. In the adjacent premises, it was found that the preparation of raw material mix was in full swing even when the registered factory had filed an application for closure in the month of July. Further, a huge amount of stock of raw materials to the extent of 5007 Kg. was found in the adjace ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ietor of M/s Shree Swaroop Product has taken on rent four premises and making use of raw material prepared in the premises adjacent to the registered factory, sent the raw material-mix to the three unregistered premises. In the three premises, by installing 12 machines illegally, gutka has been packed and sold bearing the brand name Paheli. On the basis of the evidences produced by Revenue, the case is fairly established. It is settled proposition that in quasi judicial proceedings, the level of evidence required to be produced is to be such that the case is established to the extent of preponderance of probability. The standard of proof need not be as required in the case of judicial proceedings. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we hold that Shri Mukesh Katheil has carried out manufacture of gutka using 12 packing machines in illegal factories. Hence, we uphold the demand of Central Excise duty to the extent of ₹ 1.5 crores along with interest and equal amount of penalty from Shri Mukesh Katheil, proprietor of M/s Shree Swaroop Products. 17. Penalties have also been imposed amounting to ₹ 10 lakhs each on various persons. We note that all the persons have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
