2009 (11) TMI 803

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for the Respondent. ORDER This is an appeal by the department against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 9-8-2007. 2. None appears for the respondent in spite of notice. Heard the learned DR. 3. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the respondents have two units one at 11-12, Industrial Area No. 2, A B Road, Dewas, (Unit No. 1) and another at 76, Industrial Area. No. 3, A....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ds but allowed the same to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 3 lakhs. He also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,84,000/- under Rule 25; and a penalty of Rs. 2,72,629/- under Rule 13(1) for violation of provisions of Rule 4(5) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 on Unit No. 1. In addition, he imposed a separate penalty of Rs. 1,84,000/- on the second unit. Commissioner (Appeals) in pursuance of remand order ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... proper records on daily basis. It was also canvassed that respondent No. 1 and 2 are separate entities having separate central excise registrations and, therefore, separate penalty on unit No. 2 was also justified. It has also been contended that the case laws relied upon by the Commissioner related to condonation of technical lapses and in the instant case the respondents have failed to observe ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....effect that the said clearance under delivery challans have not been entered in the daily stock register of Unit No. 1. The Commissioner has come to the conclusion that it is a case of improper maintenance of accounts but there is no intention to evade excise duty. The grounds of appeal clearly indicate that the goods have been exported to China and Ethiopia. This is in conformity of claim of resp....