TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (1) TMI 532
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... applications are disposed off by this common order. S/Shri Rajesh Gupta, Vice-President, and Shri Ashok Bohra, General Manager of the applicant firm are the co-applicants. 2. The applicants are registered with the Central Excise Department and availing the benefit of cenvat credit of the Central Excise Duty/CVD paid on the input materials purchased locally as well as imported. They had imported Heavy Melting Scrap under seven Bills of Entry and MS defective coils under one Bill of Entry during the period 5-2-2002 to 19-2-2002. On intelligence, officers of Chennai Customs took up investigations and a Show Cause Notice bearing F. No. S. Misc. 06/2002 RD (RSI-SEA) O.S. 12/2002 RD (SEA), dated 9-9-2002, was issued by the Commissioner, Chennai Customs, demanding differential duty of Rs. 47,35,822/-, besides proposal for imposition of fine, penalty, interest and appropriating Rs. 35,20,245/- deposited during the course of investigation and penalty on the Vice-President of the applicant company. Based on the investigations conducted by the Customs Department, Central Excise, Chennai II Commissionerate, issued a Show Cause Notice to disallow the cenvat credit of Rs. 4,24,725/- wrong....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction, in compliance with the aforesaid directions of the commission, the Commissioner (Investigations) submitted his investigation report dated 9-11-2005, a copy of which was handed over to the applicant as well as the respondent Commissioner of Customs (Sea port) and Commissioner, Central Excise, Chennai II Commissionerate. The Investigation report concluded that the documents relied by the applicants are genuine and the claim of the applicants are acceptable. The Customs department in their comments on the Investigation report mainly relied on the statements recorded from Shri Rajesh Gupta; Shri Ashok Kumar and Shri G. Thiagarajan, the Central Excise department in their comments also relied on the statements. 5. The case was posted for final hearing on 20-12-2005. Shri S.Venkatachalam, Advocate appeared for the applicant while the Revenue was represented by Shri M. Gnanasundaram, Deputy Commissioner, (DEPB) Chennai Customs and Shri A. Prasad, Assistant Commissioner, Division-V, Chennai II Commissionerate, Chennai. 6. The Advocate highlighted the various contentions made in their application and stated that the applicant has already paid a sum of Rs. 35,20,245/-, depo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....representative agreed with the investigation report but stated that the duty liability should be more than Rs. 7.5 lakhs. 8. The representative of Central Excise Department submitted that based on records, end use certificates were given and the Show Cause Notice was based on the statements given before the Customs authorities. 9. When the Bench asked the applicant how much they have admitted, the advocate for the applicant submitted that they have admitted a duty liability of Rs. 7,44,402/- towards customs duty and Rs. 1,81,519/- towards central excise duty and they have already paid a sum of Rs. 35,02,245/- during the course of investigation and, prayed for immunity from interest, penalty and prosecution for the applicant and co-applicants and grant of refund of amount already paid in excess of the admitted amount and not to disallow balance Cenvat credit. 10. The Bench has heard both sides and perused the records. It is seen from the records that the imported scrap and defective coils were subjected to thorough examination at the time of clearance by the Customs authorities as detailed below : Bill of Entry No. Container Nos. Container Selected for verificat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....including the indigenous material. However in the factory, at the time of visit, the officers did not notice any stock difference. If the allegation were true then there would have been a stock difference of about 1000 MT of scrap. Moreover it is also noticed that at the time of officers' visit on 5-3-02, a part of the imported scrap was lying in stock as detailed below : Bill of Entry Quantity in stock at Manali (MT) Stock available at Factory (MT) 377681 10.250 27.440 377762 - - 379969 126.760 - 379982 18.220 97.00 380100 - 11.582 377676 - - 377692 216.970 - 13. When the stock itself was available the officers would have verified the imported material. No such verification report is furnished in the Show Cause Notice. 14. The department has relied on note books maintained by Shri Rajendra Singh, which was handed over to the department by him. The officers conducted the search and seizure on 5-3-02 but did not recover the note books. Shri Rajendra Singh appeared before the officers to give statements in the Custom House on 11-3-02 and handed over the said note books on 14-3-02 when he gave the second statement. If the appli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he factory and consumption of the same in the manufacture of final product, the applicants claim is acceptable. 16. With regard to defective coil, there is no evidence for the import of 31.170 MTs, in excess. The applicants submitted a certificate from M/s. Perfect Weighing System, a supplier of electronic weigh bridge. The certificate says that the weigh bridge was defective on 17-2-02 and subsequently repaired on the next day. The applicant have also submitted documents such as Tare weighment slips of the same vehicle from another weigh bridge to prove that the weigh bridge was defective. The Commissioner (Investigation) has also agreed with the contentions of the applicants. The test report dated 24-5-02 of NML clearly states that the imported goods are secondary coils and therefore the applicants claim in this regard is acceptable. 17. The applicants have already paid an amount of Rs. 35,20,245/- before the issue of Show Cause Notice whereas the admitted duty liability works out to Rs. 7,44,402/- on the Customs side. For any amount in excess of the duty liability paid, the applicant is free to approach the Jurisdictional Commissioner of Customs for refun....