2009 (1) TMI 636

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ble for the SSI exemption. He demanded duty of Rs. 9,84,39,315/- from CFI and imposed penalties on CFI and S/Shri K.A. Shabu, M.A. Nishad, Mujib Rahim & P.D. Robin. He confiscated ninety four pieces of photocopiers seized from the premises of CFI and offered CFI an option to redeem them on payment of a fine of Rs. 20 lakhs. The penalties ordered had taken into account also the confiscation of these machines. This order dated 28-3-07 of the Commissioner was challenged by CFI & others. Vide Final Order No. 633-637/08 dated 2-7-08 [2008 (231) E.L.T. 224 (Tribunal)], the Tribunal affirmed the finding of evasion by CFI. The evasion had been quantified by clubbing clearances of CFI and its fronts. Since the front firms had not been put on notice ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....art of the clearances against other units. The order impugned in the appeal had recorded unambiguously that the other units were 'fictitious concerns'. Before the Tribunal, it was submitted that unit-wise clearance values were never reckoned in the proceedings to quantify evasion. There were no clearances made by the dummies. In all the cases considered by the judicial authorities cited and relied upon to pass the Final Order, the dummy units were real and had made clearances. Demand for duty on aggregate clearances of the dummies and the main unit had been vacated in each of those cases for not putting the dummy units on notice before adjudicating the demand of duty. The Tribunal had wrongly applied the ratio of the decisions cited by CFI ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... showed the numerous references to 'fictitious concerns'. As regards the other application, it was submitted that the Tribunal had rightly vacated the illegal fine. He also submitted that a ROM petition should not require elaborate arguments and should point out the manifest error. He relied on Apex Court's judgment in the case of Deva Metal Powders Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P. reported in 2008 (221) E.L.T. 16 (S.C.) = 2008 (9) S.T.R. 113 (S.C.) in support of this argument. 5. We have carefully considered the ROM petition, the cross objections and the submissions by both sides. We find that CFI had actually made all the impugned clearances clandestinely and received proceeds. The dummies were created by CFI to evade ....