2016 (12) TMI 1681

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for manufacturing and export of the goods, but were diverted and clearance of finished goods, which were not manufactured out of the imported raw materials - Held that: - one of the employees of Universal Impex (100% EOU) in the presence of independent panch witness, categorically stated that he had prepared the invoices and AR-3As on the directions of the appellant and only invoices and AR-3As we .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... absence of any representation. 3. Heard the learned departmental representative and perused the records. 4. The issue that falls for consideration in this appeal is regarding the penalty imposed on the appellant under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. 5. Very briefly stated the facts are that the appellant has been considered as a m .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mposed under Section 112 of the Customs Act without mentioning sub-clause is illegal. 6. It is noticed from the impugned order that in Paragraph 4, the adjudicating authority has recorded a clear finding that one of the employees of Universal Impex (100% EOU) in the presence of independent panch witness, categorically stated that he had prepared the invoices and AR-3As on the directions of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X