TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (6) TMI 273
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e revolves around the interception of one tempo caught red handed carrying goods manufactured by the appellants without any evidence of payment of Central Excise duty as well as the goods alleged to have been removed in a clandestine manner, relying on certain loose sheets, which were recovered from the factory premises during the follow up investigation, endorsed in the statements of the Director, Accountant and the Production Supervisor of the company. 2. Show cause notice issued to the appellants on 14-8-2002 alleges evasion of excise duty by the appellants against a backdrop of the following events :- (1) Interception of the tempo carrying the excisable goods (pan masala/Gutka) without evidence of payment of duty on 19-2-2002. (2) Central Excise Officers visiting the premises of the appellants to discover that 26 machines were actually running making excisable goods as against an intimation given to the departmet according to which only 14 machines were engaged by the appellants in their factory; (3) Unearthing of the two godowns which were not earlier disclosed by the appellants in whi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., Director and Clerk of assessee Company in their statements given before Revenue Officers and which were neither modified nor retracted was sufficient evidence for confiscation and penalty. (ii) In M/s. A.K. Engg. Co. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta-1 [2002 (141) E.L.T. 449 (Tri.-Kolkata) it was held that the charge of clandestine removal was sustainable when, on interception of vehicle transporting goods without payment of duty, totality of evidence by way of statements both of Proprietor and Manager admitting to manufacture of goods without maintenance of accounts, removal thereof without payment of duty and a private notebook recovered all constitute the evidence thereof. (iii) In M/s. Universal Radiators Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore [2002 (148) E.L.T. 1193 (Tri.-Chennai)] it was held that admission made by the Purchase Assistant, Authorised Signatory that there was clandestine manufacture and removal of goods, and such admission never resiled at anytime, findings of manufacture and clandestine removal of goods as arrived were quite reasonable. (iv) In Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad v. Vidya ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....anufactured and packed etc. (ii) Gurpreet Rubber Industries v. Collector of Central Excise - 1996 (82) E.L.T. 347 (Tribunal): The note-book maintained by a casual worker containing entries of production was not to be relied upon to establish clandestine removal unless supported by other evidence such as installed capacity of factory, raw material utilization, labour employed etc. (iii) Prempreet Textile Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Surat-I [2001 (134) E.L.T. 691]: The charge of clandestine removal of yarn on the basis mainly of some entries in a private register was not sustainable. (iv) Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh v. Laxmi Engineering Works - 2001 (134) E.L.T. 811 (Tribunal-Del.): Nothing on record shows any corroborative evidence in the form of receipt of raw materials or sale of final products to different buyers in a clandestine manner and that the department's case was based only on slips which did not contain names of customers or any other details regarding receipt or manufacture and clearance and hence charge was not proved. (v) CCE, Coimbatore v. Sasidhara Dyers [2003....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....orking of the demand of duty, as they had based their calculations only in respect of 50 paise per pouch that is in a most reasonable and minimum level. The learned SDR referred to the provisions under Section 36A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 raising presumption as to documents in certain cases and submitted that similar presumption should be applied even to the proceedings under this Act. He relied upon the following decisions :- (i) Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad v. Vidya Wires (P) Ltd. [2002 (149) E.L.T. 1448 (Tri.-Del )]: Once Managing Director of the assessee firm admitted that 18 boxes of super enameled copper wire had been removed without payment of duty and some of the goods with the labels of the assessee's firm had been found in the premises of customer, preponderance of probability in regard to clandestine removal was in favour of department. (ii) A.K. Engg. Co. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta-I [2002 (141) E.L.T. 449]: The charge of clandestine removal is sustainable, when on interception of vehicle transporting goods without payment of duty, totality of evidence by way of statements both of propri....