9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (11) TMI 89X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whereby the goods worth Rs. 99,39,334.00 seized from the petitioners on 12-7-1995 were directed to be confiscated, demand of duty of Rs. 53,55,862.00 was confirmed, penalty of Rs. 55,00,000 was imposed on the petitioners and further penalty of Rs. 10 lacs each were imposed on Sri Mukul Gupta partner of M/s. Q.F.C. and on Smt. Bandana Gupta and Smt. Veena Gupta partners of M/s. Quality Chemicals and M/s. Flavour and their units under Section 209-A of the Act and a penalty of Rs. 10 lacs was imposed on one Alok Kumar Tewari proprietor of M/s. West Roadways under Section 209A. Against the orders passed by the Adjudicating authority appeals were filed which were dismissed by Respondent No. 1, Customs, Excise and Gold (Control), Appellate Tribunal New Delhi vide order dated 14-5-1999 as contained in Annexure-4 to the writ petition. Thereafter the petitioners moved various applications under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act for rectification of the mistake in the order passed under sub-section (1). These applications were originally heard by a Bench comprising of two members. There was difference of opinion between the members who passed the orders dated 27-9-1999. Thereafter th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . the consignors and consignees. This has not been done despite repeated requests, hence the petitioners on their own contacted the consignors and consignees and filed their affidavit that the good covering the G. Rs. were dispatched by the respective consignors and received by the respective consignees. They also obtained photostat copies of the accounts of the consignors and consignees showing that the payments made for respective consignments through bank drafts and deposited in the respective account books prior to the date of the visit of the Central Excise Officers to the factory of the petitioners and the seizure of the G. Rs. in order to prove the genuineness of the seized G. Rs. The bank drafts and the bank accounts cannot be manipulated subsequently. The Tribunal while passing the impugned order did not give proper consideration and weight to the material furnished by the petitioners and passed the order. 5.On the other hand, Sri Shishir Kumar, learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the Tribunal has considered all the submissions made before it and material on record to arrive at a finding of fact that two trading units were in entity and two alleged units are bein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icates from the consignors and consignees. The genuineness of these certificates has not been doubted and the contents of the certificates are verifiable and supported by the factum that payments were made through bank drafts prior to the date of making survey. Thus, the entire case against petitioners has been made out merely on the basis of the surmises and presumptions without substantial evidence on record and without verification as claimed by the petitioners. 8.In Para 25 of the Tribunal's order it has been observed that some of the G. Rs. resumed indicated that the trading unit purchased goods from M/s. D.D. Shah Fragrances (P) Ltd., Bombay, Besta Laboratories Vapi, Bombay, Indian Flavours and Fragrances (Pvt.) Ltd., Bombay. Submission of Sri Mathur is that the G. Rs. are only transport documents, which show the quantity of the goods, dispatched by a particular consignor to a particular consignee. Sri Mathur has submitted that these G. Rs. do not show the source of purchases. Sri Mathur has rightly contended that the Tribunal has not looked into the records and passed the order mechanically taking the allegations made in the show cause notice to be correct and without real ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sions of this sub-section shall have effect as if for the words six months, the words five years were substituted. Submission of Sri A.P. Mathur is that duty has been demanded for the period 14-10-1993 to 14-6-1995 whereas the show cause notice has been issued on 3-1-1996 invoking the extended period of limitation. The Tribunal in Para 29 of the impugned order has observed that no intimation was sent to the Central Excise Authorities about stoppage of production. Thus, there was suppression and mis-statement inasmuch as on the date of visit of the Officers 8 fractional distillation columns, some deep freezers and two centrifugals were found working and the claim of the appellant that it was working on behalf of the trading unit on the trial basis was not substantiated by any documentary evidence. The Tribunal held that proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act has rightly been invoked and demand has rightly been confirmed beyond the period of six months and is sustainable under law. Submission of Sri Mathur is that this finding of the Tribunal is contrary to the records. 8 fractional distillation columns were found installed in one of the trading units which has separate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
