9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 859X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n which no custom duty was paid and no CENVAT credit availed. - further, the appellants have enclosed register of purchase of scrap without payment of duty for the period from 01.04.2014 to 31.08.2014. The Audit has worked out the duty on the basis of Tally Accountants Software and has not properly examined all the documents produced by the appellants and the demand has been worked on the basis of surmises and conjectures - the impugned order set aside and matter remanded back to the Original Authority to pass a denovo order on the basis of the various records produced by the appellant - appeal allowed by way of remand. - E/20686/2018-SM - Final Order No.20159/2019 - Dated:- 14-2-2019 - SHRI S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER V.M. Doiphod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . K. Janaki Raman, Chief Financial Officer of the M/s. Vijaya Steels Ltd. was recorded wherein inter alia he stated that the appellants have purchased MS scrap without payment of duty and have consumed part of such scrap for production and also removed part quantity without payment of duty that they have filed periodical returns to the Department and they have not suppressed the fact of clearances of scrap without payment of duty. On these allegations, a SCN was issued proposing to demand duty of ₹ 38,44,544/- for the period from 01.04.2012 to 13.10.2014 along with interest and also proposing the penalty. After due process, the Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 29.07.2016 confirmed the duty demand of ₹ 38,44,544/- along wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 9 10. He also submitted that the Commissioner (A) has erred in observing that the appellants have produced Annexure 4 for the period from 01.04.2011 to 13.09.2011 and 01.10.2012 to 01.02.2013; however, the period in dispute is from April 2012 to October 2014 and the appellants have not produced register for the entire period disregarding the fact that the appellant has produced ER-6 Returns, ledger of sale of scrap, statement and purchase of non-cenvatable scrap for the period 01.04.2011 to 27.01.2013 showing receipt of scrap on which no excise duty was paid and no CENVAT credit availed. The appellant has enclosed a ledger of purchase of scrap without payment of duty for the period 01.04.2014 to 31.08.2014 showing total purchase of 263. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rties and perusal of the material on record, I find that the impugned order in Para 16 has come to the conclusion that the appellant could not submit proper explanation for clearance of scrap without payment of duty for the period from February 2014 to October 2014 for which they shall be liable to pay duty along with interest. Further, I find that the Commissioner (A) has said that the appellants have been filing Returns from time to time and there is no suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of duty and therefore, he dropped the demand for the extended period but confirmed the demand for normal period and without quantifying the same, he remanded the matter to the Original Authority. Further, I find that the final finding of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
