Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

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
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

1998 (7) TMI 215

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order]. - This is an appeal filed by M/s. Sikhar Marbles (P) Ltd., being aggrieved with the Order-in-Original dated 3-1-1994 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur. 2. The matter relates to the demand of Central Excise duty of Rs. 1,45,075/- in respect of the marble tiles alleged to have been removed without payment of Central Excise duty. A penalty of Rs. 20,000/- had also ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../Revenue. 4. Shri A.L. Mathur, Consultant, submitted that the private record was maintained by the Sorter for his own purpose and did not reflect the excisable production and clearance. He submitted that all the entries were covered by the excise gate passes and that except those quantities which the appellants themselves had admitted to have been removed without payment of duty, no other qu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ls as contained in the private records maintained by the Sorter of the marble tiles one Thomas George. The Director of the Company in his statement recorded on 19-11-1991 had admitted that some quantity of marble tiles had not been entered in the RG-1 Register and the same had been removed without payment of Central Excise duty and without issue of gate passes. The appellants had voluntarily debit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....out payment of duty and had deposited a sum of Rs. 1,969/- out of the total demand of Rs. 1,45,075/-. The appellants were working under the self-removal procedure under which a great trust is reposed in the assessees. Taking note of this fact and taking into account the admission of the appellants, I confirm the amount of penalty of Rs. 20,000/- imposed on the appellants. The demand of Rs. 1,969/-....