2013 (11) TMI 1121

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....istence in form of cones/cheese. The yarn in cone/cheese can be converted into plain reel hanks or cross reel hanks on some machines. Exemption notification no.8/96-CE dated 23.07.96, as amended from time to time, fully exempted the cotton yarn on plain reel hanks from the whole of the duty. The appellant, during the period of dispute, were clearing cotton yarn at nil rate of duty under notification no.8/96-CE by claiming the same to be on plain reel hanks. In the invoices, the yarn was being described as the PRH/cheese. On receipt of information that the appellant are evading duty by mis-declaring the description of the yarn and were in fact clearing the yarn in form of cones, which is not exempted, inquiries were made with their customer,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the above investigation, a show cause notice dated 5.7.2002 was issued to the appellant company and its Director, Shri Nand Lal Arora for (a) Demand of central excise duty issued amounting to Rs.94,602/- in respect of the clearances of yarn during the period 1.4.2002 to 23.5.2000 alongwith interest thereon under Section 11 AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944; (b) Imposition of penalty on the Appellant company under Section 11AC and on Shri Nand Lal Arora, Director of the appellant company under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2001.. 1.4. The above show cause notice was adjudicated by the Asstt. Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 30.11.20 by which he the mentioned duty demand was confirmed against the appellant along wi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....41) ELT 558 (T) and that in view of the above submissions, the impugned is not sustainable. 4. Ms. Ranjana Jha, Joint CDR, defended the impugned order by reiterating the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) and emphasized that allegation against the appellant are based on the concrete evidence on record, that the documents recovered from the appellants customers, M/s. Laxmi Trading Company/ M/s Laxmi Industries mention that the yarn received by them from the appellant was in cone form and that it is the yarn in cone form which had been sold by them to various customers, as the invoices issued by Laxmi Trading Company to their customers mentioned the sale of yarn in cone form only and not in hank form and that employees of the Laxmi Tr....