2008 (4) TMI 585

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... DR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The Appellant is the Managing Director of M/s. La Chem Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (in short the Company) filed this appeal against imposition of penalty of Rs. 1,08,000/- for his involvement of manipulation of TR-6 challan and Rs. 25,000/- for involvement in keeping unaccounted excisable goods, under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. It has been alleged....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted by the company and also imposed penalty of equal amount under Section 11AC on the shortage of inputs upon the Company. He also imposed penalties upon the Appellant as stated above which has been upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. The learned Advocate on behalf of the Appellants submits that the alleged forging of TR-6 challans were committed by the Accountant of the Company and t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....urt in the case of Cosmic Dye Chemical v. CCE, Bombay reported in 1995 (75) E.L.T. 721 (S.C.). He further submits that even Shri C.S. Nandwani was looking after day to day work of the Company and he is overall responsible under the Companies Act. 4. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the record, it is seen that the shortage was detected during stock verification and the appella....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ocate submits that in this case, Rule 26 of the Rules cannot be invoked. I find that it is an admitted fact of forgery of TR-6 challan, which is a serious offence and the appellant cannot be escaped from his responsibility as it is a matter of accounts. The Rule 26 of the Rules is applicable herein. The imposition of penalty on the Appellant is justified. 7. In view of the above discussion....