TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal confirms duty on fabrics, imposes penalties, and modifies fines in clandestine removal case.</h1> <h3>ATUL GAMANLAL GANDHI Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., SURAT</h3> ATUL GAMANLAL GANDHI Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., SURAT - 2007 (209) E.L.T. 248 (Tri. - Mumbai) Issues: Duty confirmation on alleged clandestine removal of man-made fabrics, personal penalty imposition, confiscation of seized goods, and reduction of penalties.In this case, the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai upheld the duty confirmation of Rs. 91,130.95 on the appellant for alleged clandestine removal of man-made fabrics by a factory. The tribunal also imposed a personal penalty of the same amount on the appellant. Additionally, seized excess goods found in the factory were confiscated, with an option for redemption on payment of a fine of Rs. 2 lakhs. A personal penalty of Rs. 25,000 was imposed on the partner of the factory under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.The tribunal considered the facts that Central Excise Officers found discrepancies in the factory's records during a visit. The officers discovered finished printed fabrics missing from the register, which the partner admitted to selling in the open market without paying duty. Subsequently, proceedings were initiated leading to the impugned order confirming the demand, confiscating seized goods, and imposing penalties.The tribunal noted that the partner's initial admission of selling goods without duty payment was not retracted until much later when a different explanation was provided. The tribunal deemed this change in stance as an afterthought and held that the unexplained shortage, along with the unretracted confession, was sufficient evidence against the appellant. The tribunal also highlighted the significant unaccounted quantity of fabrics in the register, indicating discrepancies in production records.Despite rejecting the appeal on its merits, the tribunal reduced the penalties imposed. The penalty on the factory was reduced to Rs. 35,000, and the penalty on the partner was reduced to Rs. 5,000. Furthermore, the redemption fine was reduced from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 25,000. The tribunal maintained the rejection of the appeals except for the modifications on penalties and fines.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
