2014 (4) TMI 578

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nit it was observed that the appellants had received goods from their principal manufacturers for carrying out job work. The appellants, instead of clearing goods manufactured out of the said raw materials received from their principal manufacturers, cleared their own manufactured finished goods under the cover of job work challans to the principal manufacturers during period from 15.05.2007 to 01.11.2007. A SCN dated 21.07.2011 was issued to the appellants demanding duty of RS 12,66,230/- under Sec. 11A of Central Excise Act, 1044 (hereinafter referred to as 'CEA') on their own challan alongwith interest under Sec 11AB of CEA and imposition of Rules 2002 (hereinafter referred as 'CER') on the grounds that goods cleared without payment of d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h was incidentally the same i.e., copper rods. It is his submission that subsequently the appellant had discharged Central Excise duty on the copper rods which were cleared by them, which were manufactured out of job worked items. It is his submission that there was no evidence of corroborative nature to prove that there has clandestine removal of goods as the finished goods was sent back to main principal manufacturer under job work challan. It is also his submission that when the investigation took place in November 2007, panchnama, statements were recorded on the same date but Show Cause Notice was issued on 21.7.2011 hence demand cannot sustained for extended period. He would submit that at the most, the appellant can be held to have vi....