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>Appeal outcome: Demand confirmed on clandestine clearance, deemed credit disallowed, penalty reduced, assets confiscation set aside.</h1> <h3>MODERN STEEL INDUSTRIES Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., MEERUT</h3> MODERN STEEL INDUSTRIES Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., MEERUT - 2000 (124) E.L.T. 444 (Tribunal) Issues:1. Demand confirmation on clandestine clearance of M.S. Flats2. Disallowance of deemed credit on M.S. Billets3. Imposition of penalty4. Confiscation of assetsAnalysis:Issue 1: Demand Confirmation on Clandestine Clearance of M.S. FlatsThe case involved the clandestine clearance of M.S. Flats by the appellants. The Central Excise Officers discovered the clandestine clearance of M.S. Billets and issued a show cause notice to the appellants. The appellants contested the demand, arguing that it was based on assumptions. The appellants claimed they had opted for Modvat credit and had not received the quantity alleged by the authorities. The Tribunal found that the Department failed to provide sufficient evidence of actual delivery of the goods to the appellants, leading to the appeal being allowed on this issue.Issue 2: Disallowance of Deemed Credit on M.S. BilletsThe appellants had availed deemed Modvat credit on M.S. Billets, claiming they were duty paid. However, investigations revealed that these billets were manufactured by a company without duty payment. As a result, the Tribunal ruled that the deemed Modvat credit was wrongly taken by the appellants, leading to the appeal being dismissed on this count.Issue 3: Imposition of PenaltyThe Tribunal held that the appellants had wrongly taken deemed Modvat credit despite knowing the goods were non-duty paid, justifying the imposition of a penalty. However, considering the circumstances, the Tribunal deemed the initial penalty amount too harsh and reduced it from Rs. 3,50,000 to Rs. 25,000.Issue 4: Confiscation of AssetsRegarding the confiscation of land, plant, building, and machinery belonging to the appellants, the Tribunal found it unjustifiable. Therefore, the order of confiscation was set aside.In conclusion, the appeal was disposed of with the demand confirmation on clandestine clearance of M.S. Flats being rejected, the disallowance of deemed credit on M.S. Billets being upheld, the penalty being reduced, and the confiscation of assets being set aside.
TaxTMI 