2010 (9) TMI 604

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....223/08 are filed by respondents namely M/s. Sourabh Polyplast Pvt. Ltd., Shri Rajiv Agarwal and Shri Mohd. Irshad respectively. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The relevant facts in brief are that the officers visited the factory premises of the respondent company on 2-4-2004 and other respondents and conducted search. The respodents company had not maintained statutory record relating to receipt and issue of cenvetable inputs and also had not maintained statutory record relating to production and clearance of final products for several months. The officers found 200 numbers of water storage tanks valued at Rs. 2,31,375/- not accounted. It was specifically admitted by Shri Rajiv Agarwal, Director in his statement dated 2-4-2004 that during th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ue alongwith 25% of the penalty within 30 days from the date of communication of the order. In addition, he imposed penalty of Rs. 20,000/- each on Shri Rajiv Agarwal and Shri Mohd. Irshad. 5. On appeal by these parties, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the confiscation of 200 number of water storage tanks but reduced the redemption fine from Rs. 58,000/- to Rs. 25,000/-. He upheld the duty confirmed alongwith interest as per the order of the original authority. However, he set aside the penalty of Rs. 8,15,375/- imposed under Section 11AC but imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,000/- under 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. He set aside the penalties imposed on the Directors. 6. Learned SDR submits that the respondent company have n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....carefully considered the submissions from both the sides and perused the record. As a manufacturer of excisable goods, their obligation to maintain production/clearances record on day to day basis either in RG I form or other private records as accepted by the department is a strict obligation. In this case, undisputedly the respondent company has not maintained the production record for several months and merely because certain invoices were issued in respect of certain clearances, it cannot be held that they have fulfilled their basic obligation of maintaining production and clearance records. This violation clearly attracts the provisions of Rule 25(1)(b) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. This omission has to be seen in the light of pre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d clearance of final products and admitted case of clearance without payment of duty. This is a clear case attracting the provisions of Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Therefore, the Commissioner's finding that Section 11AC is not attracted, cannot be upheld. The Commissioner (Appeals) has however, upheld the confiscation of unaccounted 200 number of water storage tanks but reduced the redemption fine from Rs. 58,000/- to Rs. 25,000/-. Since confiscation has been upheld, and the Commissioner (Appeals) has used his discretion to reduce the redemption fine, there is no need to interfere with this part of the order. 9. As regards the penalties on the Directors, in their statements given by them, both have admitted non-mai....