9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 850X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s nothing on record to show unaccounted for receipt of sale proceeds by the Appellant from any source and there is nothing on record to corroborate clandestine manufacture of such huge quantity (493.404 MT) of Aluminium Wire Rods by the Appellant. Taking into account the burning loss and generation of dross approximately at 2%, the Appellant had only 1.5 MT of carried over stock of Ingot/ Scrap as on 01.04.2003. It is also a matter of record that the Appellant did not purchase any Ingot / Scrap on its own account between April to July 2003. With only 1.5 MT of carried over stock of its own purchases of Aluminium / Scrap as on 01.04.2003, the Appellant could not have manufactured 493.404 MT of Wire Rods alleged to have been removed without payment of duty, particularly in the absence of any evidence whatsoever of record to even remotely indicate that the Appellant purchased Aluminium Ingot / Scrap from any Source other than those duly reflect4d in its statutory / private records. The finding of the Ld. Commissioner that the allegedly clandestinely removed 493.404 MT of Wire Rods were not the job-worked goods, is manifestly without any substance. Appeal allowed - decided in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Excise duty : Document Marked Description of Document Contents Page reference in paper book 17/FAC/KUNJ/03 Gate Pass Book Gate Passes for outgoing Materials of different parties 109 to 2015 16/FAC/KUNJ/03 Delivery Challan Book Delivery Challans issued by the Appellant for Wire Rods dispatched to its Group companies. 208 to 253 07/FAC/KUNJ/03 Record of Wire Rods dispatched, Finished goods outgoing (page 257 to 264) 257 to 274 11/FAC/KUNJ/03 Material Outward Register Gate Register containing entries of all materials going outward. 279 to 324 36/FAC/KUNJ/03 Computer printout of party-wise dispatches Party- wise dispatch of finished goods from January 2003 to September 2003 summary thereof in last page. 325 to 335 05/FAC/KUNJ/03 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se to the appellant. Therefore, in the course of cross examination of the DGCEI Officials during personal hearing of the case on 31.12.2005, the Appellant produced the following seized records/documents, evidencing inward receipt of inputs, got those identified by the seizing Officials and the Ld. Commissioner, having appreciated the relevance and evidentiary value thereof, admitted those on records in the course of personal hearing. :- Document marked Description of Document Contents Page reference in paper book 10/FAC/KUNJ/03 Inward receipts register Date-wise details of all inward receipts 444 to 472 13/FAC/KUNJ/03 Ingot receipt register Date-wise details of receipt of Ingot with name of suppliers [in continuation to receipts of Ingots shown in (pates 268-274) seized record No. 07/FC/KUNJ03] 476 to 486 21/FAC/KUNJ/03 Purchase Invoices Invoices of Ingots purchased by the Appellant from NALCO 488 to 508 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Scrap/in-process stock 16.415 MT d Difference [a-(b+c)] 5.936 MT (2.6%- Loss) d Difference [a-(b+c)] 27.572 MT (1.90%- Loss) TOTAL a Total input (own purchase+ job work) 1690.184 MT b Total removal as per statutory records 1640.261 MT c Scrap/in-process stock 16.415 MT Difference [a-(b+c)] 33.508 MT (2%) On the basis of the aforesaid reconciliation statement, it is submitted that they did not purchase any Aluminium Ingot on its own account during the period April 2003 to July 2003. The appellant submitted that all the Wire Rods alleged to have been removed by the Appellant clandestinely, were manufactured out of Aluminium Ingots received by it from principal manufacturer for conversion on job work basis under Notification No. 214/86-CE dated 25.03.1996 and therefore those are not liable to Central Excise Duty in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... p companies by DGCEI, there was no detection of any excess stock of Wire Rods. On the contrary, the Appellant submitted certificates from independent Chartered Accountant certifying that the group companies (principal manufacturer) have received back commensurate quantities of Wire Rods from the Appellant Company against Ingots supplied by them under job work challans. It is pertinent to note that, while no discrepancy whatsoever was found in the Appellant s group companies, namely Bharat Electrical Accessories Pvt. Ltd. (BEAPL) and Hi-Tech Powercon (P) Ltd. (Hi-tech) and therefore no Show Cause Notices were issued to them, separate Show Cause Notices were issued to Gupta cables Pvt. Ltd. (GCPL) Tirupati Conductors Pvt. Ltd. (TCPL). 8. Show Cause Notice dated 25.01.2005 issued to GCPL proposed recovery of Central Excise Duty amounting to ₹ 7,66,116/- on the allegation that the 60.5 MT of Conductors physically found short was allegedly removed without payment of duty. The SCN was adjudicated by the Joint Commissioner vide Order-in-Original No. JC/HDQR/BBSRI/ CE/14/2006 dated 30.10.2006 wherein it was held that the physical stock verification done by the DGCEI Officers w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or eventual recovery of Aluminium Metal; (ix) The allegations in the SCN are wholly uncorroborated. 10. The findings of the Ld. Commissioner in the TCPL s case is wholly applicable to the Appellant s case and therefore the same Commissioner could not have taken a different view to confirm the demand against the Appellant in the impugned order. 11. We find that there is nothing on record to suggest that the Appellant clandestinely sold the value added Aluminium / Alloy Wire Rod manufactured from out of Aluminium Ingots o 99.7% purity to any other outside party. There is no allegation of the presence of any other Conductor manufacturer in the vicinity, to whom the Appellant could possibly sell such a huge quantities of Wire Rods without payment of duty. The SCN does not place on record any evidence of unaccounted procurement of Aluminium Ingots / other inputs by the Appellant and the source from which the Appellant could procure such unaccounted for Ingots/inputs for use in the clandestine manufacture of Wire Rods. There is no reference of any buyer who might have purchased the allegedly clandestinely removed Wire Rods by the Appellant. There is nothing on record to show una ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
