2014 (3) TMI 713

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nfirming demand of Rs.16,39,289/- also equal amount of penalty under section 11AC and also personal penalty of Rs.15 lakh imposed on Shri Ramesh Gupta under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Section 11AC 2. The Brief facts of the case are that M/s. Swati Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.44-45, Sector-i, Industrial Area, Parwanoo, H.P. are engaged in the manufacture of water storage tanks, plastic pipes and non dutiable product i.e. sprinkler and drip irrigation systems falling under chapter 39 and 84 respectively of the first Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. 3. The appellants availed benefit of Notification No.49-50/2003 dated 10/6/2003 as amended by Notification No.76/2003-CE dated 5.11.2003. The respondent claimed th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(AE), Faridabad informed that M/s. R. S. Engineers, Faridabad have filed the sales tax return and have shown the amount against bill no.271 and 272 as Rs.11,000/- and Rs.10,500/- respectively and paid the sale tax @ 10% of value of amounting to Rs.21,500/-only. 4. Department in their memo of appeal pointed out that Commissioner (Appeals) has not appreciated the matter and have given the benefit for machines which were installed in the factory were old and used at the time of inspection by the department. The other points have been taken by the department in their memo of appeal are as under:- (i) That is an undisputed fact that for availing exemption from payment of duty, under Notification No.49-50/2003-CE dated 10.6.03, the existing....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... favour of supplier after verification of the machinery. Supplier as well as department checked payment of Rs.one lakkh from the bank account. It was contended that payment of Rs.one lakh was advance money and not payment of machinery. Balance payment was made by the banker through bank drafts. They were entitled to exemption under Notification No.49-50/2003-CE. They also submitted that Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly concluded that demand was not sustainable and allowed their appeals. 6. Heard both sides and also perused the grounds of appeals submitted by the Revenue. And also examined records. 7. I observe that learned Advocate for the respondent has insisted that their transaction was proper and machines were received from the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....estigation undertaken by the department exposing fraudulent act of M/s.Swati Storewell and their partner of Shri Ramesh Gupta who have organized procurement of fake invoices to purchase of machines which were never supplied. In fact records were manipulated in such a way to show receipt of two machines and subsequent installation so that they became entitled to claim area based exemption under Notification No.49-50/03 dated 10.6.03. I do not find force in the submission made by learned Counsel of the respondent that payments of Rs.one lakh to M/s.R.S.Engineers was only advance money and not payment of machine. When overwhelming incriminating evidence relating to bank transaction as well as filing of return with sales tax department showing ....