9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1531X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en visited with confiscation of seized goods, being 56,235 kgs of copper rods valued at Rs. 2,16,90,025/- plus quantity of 7861 kgs. of copper wire valued at Rs. 35,456/- on the allegation that the same were not entered in their records under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 and thereby confiscated the same with option to pay redemption fine equal to 25% of the value of the goods. Further, ordered encashing the bank guarantee given at the time of provisional release. Further, whether penalties have been rightly imposed on the appellants under Rule 25 and on the appellant Directors under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. 2. The brief facts are as follows:- 2.1 The Appellant No.-I having Central Excise registration No. AADCK8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hese coils, Shri Dharmendra replied that nine coils weighing 30,512 Kg were unloaded one day before i.e. on 11.02.2015; out of these nine coils, two coils weighing 7861 Kg have been used to draw copper wire and balance seven coils were lying here, as such. 2.4 Further, the officers also recovered stamp of M/s MCPL, Delhi from the premises. The officers found a spiral pocket note book from the drawer of Shri R.K. Singh, General Manager of Appellant No. 1 and on perusal of page no. 22 of the note book, it was noticed that the receipt of above materials on 11.02.2015 & on 12.12.2015 was, mentioned in weight terms as 30,612 Kg and 33,584 Kg respectively. 2.5 On a reasonable belief that the said copper rods were consigned by the supplier in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... if as per the Bilty, Consignee was M/s Malhotra Cables Pvt. Ltd, 69/2A, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi, then why he had taken material to M/s Kopertak Metals Pvt. Ltd., Kaharani Bhiwadi, Shri Hara Singh Yadav replied that the owner of Jaspal Golden had asked him to take the goods to Kaharani, Bhiwadi. 2.7 A statement of Shri Dharmendra S/o Shri Sant Ram, Plant Incharge, was recorded under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 on 12.02.2015, wherein he inter-alia stated that they have received 11 copper rod coils vide Truck no. RJ32GB0154 at 1100 Hrs on 12.02.2015 along with M/s Sesa Steriite Ltd, Jaipur Bill No. 3968,3969,3970 & 3971 all dated 11.02.2015 wherein consignee was M/s Malhotra Cables Pvt. Ltd, Delhi. Further he stated that he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rded under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 on 13.02.2015 wherein he inter-alia stated that he was one of the Directors of M/s Kopertek Metals (P) Ltd, Bhiwadi and he looked after the work of purchase of raw material, capital goods, etc. On being asked about the Copper Wire Rod received in their factory premises on 11.02.2015 & 12.02.2015 from M/s Sesa Sterlite Industries Ltd., Jaipur, he stated that as per his instructions, material was not entered in the gate register as bill was not as per the Purchase order and that he would submit the P.O. by 16.02.2015. 2.10 That statement of Shri Tarun Malhotra S/o Jagdish Malhotra, Director, was recorded under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act. 1944 on 13.02.2015 wherein he inter-alia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, he found the redemption fine to be excessive and accordingly, reduced the redemption fine and penalties as follows:- "8. However, having upheld the findings of the adjudicating authority as above, I find that the redemption fine has been imposed excessively. The Adjudicating Authority has imposed fine of Rs. 63,08,369/- @ 25% of the value of goods on Appellant No.1 in the above case relied upon by me, I find that Hon'ble Tribunal has stated that the redemption fine and penalty should be imposed having regard to the quantum of duty that could be evaded through the process of not recording the goods in the books of account. Having examined the overall circumstances of the cae and the duty which they would have evade, I reduce the redemp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ear 2012-13 and also intimation dated 1.4.2014 for the financial year 2014-15. Ld. Counsel further states that in spite of cooperation, the Adjudicating Authority has mis-construed the documents. Thus, the impugned order is vitiated due to factual error and the consignor of the goods have been taken to be as Malhotra Cables Pvt. Ltd. instead of the appellant company. The appellant has also drawn my attention towards the copy of the relevant invoices which are annexed to the paper book (from pages 128 to 131). 6. Accordingly, he prays for granting relief. 7. Ld. Authorised Representative for the Revenue has relied upon the impugned order. 8. Having considered the rival contentions and on going through the documents on record, I find that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
