2014 (1) TMI 626

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f them. 2. The Ld. Sr. Advocate Dr. Samir Chakraborty, for the applicants has submitted that the applicant no.1 had been extended the facility of consolidated debit of Central Excise Duty against clearances made during the day, instead of making debit against clearances of each consignment of goods during the day. As a matter of practice, the applicant prepared a statement, called 'Daily Recapitulation Statement', in which particulars of invoices issued for the day, were listed and from the said Recapitulation Statement so prepared, payment of duty for the whole day was made either debiting the PLA or Modvat Account, as the case may be. During the course of Audit of Central Excise records in the year 1997, it was noticed that the applicant....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r) on the other hand submitted that the adjudicating authority had considered the statement in detail and reduced the liability from Rs.45,91,24,705.76 to Rs.34,62,23,989.89. Therefore, it is incorrect to say that their explanation in the form of statement was not considered by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority. However, he has fairly conceded that while not accepting the explanation furnished in the statement relating to certain entries, the Appellant was not given an opportunity to explain their stand. 4. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the records. We find that the applicant no.1 has been engaged in the manufacturer of iron & steel products, in an integrated steel plant, and were accorded a facility of consolidated deb....