2014 (1) TMI 1159

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a perusal of the records, we find that, during the material period, the appellant had cleared some of their final products without payment of duty claiming the benefit of an exemption Notification (No. 3/2004-C.E. fated 8.1.2004), apart from clearance of other finished goods on payment of duty. In the course of an audit conducted by department at the premises of the appellant, it was found that no separate records had been maintained in respect of inputs used in the manufacture of dutiable goods and those used in the manufacture of exempted goods. Nevertheless, it was found, the party had collected from the buyers of their exempted goods an amount equivalent to 10% of the sale price (excluding taxes) of such goods but had not credited this ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s were contested. In adjudication of the dispute, the original authority confirmed the demand against the appellant and imposed equal amount of penalty on them. An appeal preferred against the Order-in-Original by the party did not succeed. Hence captioned appeal and stay application. 2. The submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant can be summarised as follows :- (a) The appellant had actually maintained separate accounts in respect of inputs used in the manufacture of dutiable final products and those used in the manufacture of exempted goods. This plea was consistently raised by the appellant before the lower authorities but the same was rejected without valid grounds. (b) The payment made in April 2009 was purportedly in l....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ere is no legal infirmity in the demand on the appellant. 4. After considering the submissions carefully, we have not found prima facie case for the appellant against the dues adjudged against them. Obviously, they were not maintaining separate accounts in respect of inputs used in the manufacture of dutiable and exempted final products. Their claim to the contra appears to be just an ipse dixit. We called upon the learned counsel to produce the relevant records, if any. But he was unable to do so. Moreover, as rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Commissioner (AR), the conduct of the appellant also discloses that they felt that they were entitled to collect 10% of the sale price of the exempted goods from their customer. The purc....