TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 1029
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....manufacture automobile components. Shri V K Mehta, is the Vice Chairman and Managing Director of the Company, while Shri Suresh Garg, is the Finance Manager and Shri K.P.Chitrasenan, is the Excise Assistant. The period of dispute in this case is from January, 1995 to November, 1996. 1.2 On 27.11.96, the factory of the appellant company at Faridabad was visited by the jurisdictional Central Excise Officers, and in the course of search of the factory premises, a number of invoices were found which appeared to be parallel invoices. The investigating officer studied the documents taken over by them and made enquiry with the Managing director and employees of the company. There are four allegations against the appellant company involving duty....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... goods had initially been cleared on payment of duty but the customers on finding the goods defective had returned the same for repairs. The appellant after clearing the goods after repair/reconditioning had issued cenvatable invoices showing payment of duty through cenvat credit account but debit entry was found to be bogus and as such no duty had been paid either through cenvat credit account or through PLA. The appellant while receiving defective goods, had not taken credit of the duty paid on the goods and therefore, under Rule 173H should have returned the goods without payment of duty under challan etc. but instead, they returned the goods under parallel invoice showing payment of duty while no such duty had been paid. The duty demand....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en filed. 2. None appeared for the appellant, though the notice for hearing had been sent to them well in time. It is seen that on earlier occasion also none represented the appellant. There is letter dated 23.1.2015 of Shri Laximkumaran, Advocate addressed to the Registrar stating that while they were representing the appellant in the case but due to unavoidable circumstances, they are withdrawing from this matter and they have also informed the appellant in this regard, through E-mail. It is seen that earlier this matter had been listed for hearing on 23.1.15 and on 17.2.15 and on both occasions none represented the appellant. In view of the matter, so far as the appellant are concerned, the case is being decided ex-parte. 3. We hav....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....turned by the customers cleared after repair/reconditioning, there is no dispute that initially the goods had been cleared on payment of duty but subsequently the same were found to be defective, and were returned by the customers and the appellant received those goods under Rule 173H but opted not to avail credit of duty initially paid on the goods. However, the appellant, after clearing the goods after repair/reconditioning had issued the cenvatable invoices showing payment of duty through cenvat credit account but debit entries were found to be bogus and as such no duty had been paid either through cenvat credit account or through PLA. Since in this case, there is no dispute that initially the goods had been cleared on payment of duty an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lanation regarding this discrepancy, we are of the view the duty demand of Rs. 73,821/- has to be upheld. 9. In view of this, out of total duty demand of Rs. 2,15,68,150/-., duty demand of Rs. 2,06,26,961/- is upheld and the remaining duty demand is set aside. As the provisions of section 11AB had been introduced in Central Excise Act with effect from 28.9.96, the interest would be chargeable in respect of clearance during the period from 28.9.96 to November, 1996, No interest on duty confirmed for the period prior to 28.9.96 has been charged. However, penalty under Rule 173Q (1) (d) is upheld. 10. As regards, imposition of penalty under Rule 209A on Shri Suresh Garg, Manager Finance and Shri K.P.Chitrasenan, Excise Assistant, since t....