2001 (5) TMI 315

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted as under : 3. M/s. Kanpur Pesticides & Chemicals (P) Ltd., Industrial Area Kanpur were engaged in the manufacture of S.O. Dyes and those were classifiable under sub-heading 3204.29 of the CETA. The factory premises of the company on receipt of intelligence report was raided and searched on 16-2-1995 by the Central Excise Officers. The search was also conducted on the premises of their dealers, stockists and Directors/Executives of the company. On scrutiny of record it revealed that the assessable value of the goods declared by the company at the time of clearance was, much less than the actual value at which those were sold. It also revealed that the goods were cleared to the trading firm which was managed by the present appella....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ule 209A(1) of the Rules. 4. The present appeal has been filed only by Shri S.K. Garg. 5. The learned counsel has contended that the appellant had no connection with the company M/s. Kanpur Pesticides & Chemicals (P) Ltd. which was engaged in the manufacture of S.O. Dyes and allegedly evaded payment of excise duty thereon and as such no penalty under Rule 209A of the Rules could be imposed on him. He has further submitted that no copies of the documents were supplied to the appellant and he could not file proper reply to the show cause notice. Therefore, there had been violation of principles of natural justice in passing the impugned order. 6. On the other hand, the learned SDR has argued that Shri S.K. Garg himself....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dmitted that the record regarding the affairs of the company about the sale of the goods was recovered and seized from his house during the course of search by the officers of Directorate of Anti-Evasion on 16-2-1995 under panchnama. His statement itself was enough, for the Commissioner to reject his plea of having no concern with the affairs of the company and evasion of excise duty on the goods cleared from the factory premises of the company. Rather, it was quite evident from his own admission that it was he who was managing the affairs of the company and looking after the sale and clearance of the goods. The goods manufactured by the company were traded by him through different firms which too were floated by him. The company, as observ....