Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Paragon Group faces upheld duty demands and penalties for Central Excise evasion, appeals dismissed.</h1> <h3>M/s Paragon Cables Company and others Versus CCE, DELHI-I</h3> The tribunal confirmed substantial evasion of Central Excise duty by the Paragon group and related entities, upholding duty demands and penalties imposed, ... Mis-declaration of goods – Suppression in the value of goods - Goods seized from different premises were proved to be supplied by paragon group of companies including Roxy Electrical and Roxy Cable Company - Appellants failed to rule out their role as consignors of misdeclared goods - Goods seized at various places and consignment of past clearances revealed that description of goods differed in quantity, quality, length and nature of goods and composition as well as characteristics thereof and such difference admitted - Value of goods consigned was also suppressed - Various evidence both oral and documentary revealed a planned evasion by appellants - Suppliers of the goods having been found to be involved were also penalized -persons dealing with such goods were penalised for no proof of their innocence. Quantum of redemption fine – Held that:- Authority below did not justify levy of such huge redemption fine without examining any other undue gain other than duty element if nay made by that appellant - Making an overall assessment of the situation, redemption fine in the case of Metal and Metal (Elect.) Pvt. Ltd. is reduced which shall be twice the duty element looking to the magnitude of evasion and questionable modus operandi followed – Decided partly in favour of Assessee. Issues Involved:1. Alleged large-scale evasion of Central Excise duty by manufacturers of wires and cables.2. Suppression of actual quantity/value of clearances.3. Misdeclaration of goods.4. Clandestine removal of goods.5. Use of brand name without payment of duty.6. Imposition of redemption fines and penalties.7. Validity of the adjudication process.Detailed Analysis:1. Alleged Large-Scale Evasion of Central Excise Duty:The Revenue conducted an enquiry revealing that manufacturers of wires and cables under Chapter heading no.8544.90 were evading Central Excise duty by falsely claiming SSI exemptions. The manufacturers suppressed over 50% of actual clearances by misdescribing sizes and understating weights on invoices and lorry receipts. Searches on 21.02.2002 at various premises, including Paragon Cable Co. and related entities, uncovered incriminating documents and excess unaccounted stock.2. Suppression of Actual Quantity/Value of Clearances:Investigations revealed that the Paragon group had suppressed actual clearances by recording lesser quantities on invoices compared to what was dispatched, as evidenced by lorry receipts from Saurashtra Roadways and Prakash Roadlines. This suppression aimed to evade Central Excise duty.3. Misdeclaration of Goods:The Paragon group misdeclared goods by showing armoured cables as unarmoured, copper cables as aluminium, and larger cables as smaller ones. Seized goods were valued at Rs. 27,74,596/-, leading to a duty demand of Rs. 1,20,463/- and equal penalties under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944.4. Clandestine Removal of Goods:Searches at various premises, including Roxy Electricals and Janata Cable Company, revealed unaccounted branded wires and cables, leading to seizures and penalties. The investigation found that these entities were financially supported by Paragon Cable Co. and were manufacturing and clearing goods without Central Excise registration, thereby evading duty.5. Use of Brand Name Without Payment of Duty:Rolex Cable Co. and Janata Cable Co. used the 'Paragon' brand without owning it and claimed SSI exemptions they were not eligible for. This resulted in duty demands of Rs. 15,58,069/- and Rs. 14,14,299/- respectively, along with penalties.6. Imposition of Redemption Fines and Penalties:The adjudicating authority imposed redemption fines and penalties on various entities and individuals. For instance, M/s Metal and Metal (Elect.) Pvt. Ltd. faced a redemption fine of Rs. 10 lakhs, which was later reduced to Rs. 2.5 lakhs by the tribunal. Similarly, Roxy Electricals faced a redemption fine of Rs. 1 lakh, reduced to Rs. 70,000/-.7. Validity of the Adjudication Process:The tribunal found that the adjudicating authority had properly evaluated and appreciated the evidence. The appellants failed to establish their innocence or bona fides. The tribunal upheld the duty demands and penalties, except for reducing the redemption fines as mentioned above.Tribunal's Findings and Decision:- The tribunal confirmed that goods seized from different premises were supplied by the Paragon group, including Roxy Electricals and Roxy Cable Company.- The appellants failed to prove their innocence in the misdeclaration and clandestine removal of goods.- The tribunal upheld the duty demands and penalties imposed in the adjudication, except for reducing the redemption fines for M/s Metal and Metal (Elect.) Pvt. Ltd. and Roxy Electricals.- The appeals were dismissed, and the adjudication process was deemed proper and justified.Conclusion:The tribunal found substantial evidence of evasion of Central Excise duty by the Paragon group and related entities. The adjudicating authority's decision was largely upheld, with minor reductions in redemption fines. The appellants' arguments were rejected, and the penalties and duty demands were confirmed.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found