9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant as were resumed/ seized by the Sales Tax Department. Also on the basis of physical stock of MS ingots taken by the Sales Tax Department itself on 16.08.2009, the further report dated 26.06.2009 and the audit reports dated 26.06.2009 the Department alleged clandestine removal of MS ingots valued at Rs. 66,56,820/- by the appellants. The Sales Tax Department had also demanded an amount of Rs. 8,36,761/- on the unaccounted sales amounting to Rs. 69,26,820/- vide their Order dated 03.07.2009. The Department accordingly issued a Show Cause Notice bearing No. 164 dated 13.04.2011 proposing the recovery of Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 5,70,771/- alongwith the interest leviable under Section 11AB and Section 11A of Central Excise Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Confirmation thereof is liable to be set aside. Though the impugned Order has dropped certain demand but the basis thereof also is the adjudication of the Sales Tax Department. It is further submitted that all relevant documents were provided by the Director of the appellant to the Excise Department. Careful scrutiny thereof reveals that the impugned allegations are wrong. Even the sales tax Adjudicating Authority vide its Order dated 16.12.2010 has wrongly confirmed the demand of Rs. 39,72,275/-. Despite that all the relevant invoices were made available even to Deputy Commissioner Commercial Tax. It is further submitted that the said Order of 16.12.2010 has appreciated that the appellant was also doing trading activities for its associate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sales Tax Department and the entire demand of recovery of Sales Tax Department confirmed by CTO Circle-3 Jaipur vide Order 37209. However, after Appeal was preferred Deputy Commissioner Commercial Tax, Jaipur vide order dated 16.12.2010 partially allowed Appeal confirming the Sales Tax liability to the tune of Rs. 1,58,891/- alongwith the interest of Rs. 3,178/- only and the penalty of Rs. 3,17,782/- only in respect of sale of goods valuing Rs. 39,72,275/- and the demand with respect to the remaining sale amounting to Rs. 29,54,545/- was dropped. 5. Perusal of that Order makes it clear that the Sales Tax Department saw accounts books of the appellant and after conducting the physical verification of the stock with those account books prep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
