2016 (12) TMI 435

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ous premises connected with the asessee and recovered records for further investigation. During the course of physical verification of stocks at factory premises, excess quantity of 1814 numbers of various varieties of PVC pipes valued at Rs. 10,05,184/-, and 49 MTs of waste parings and scrap of PVC pipes valued at Rs. 1,96,000/- were found. It appeared that the assesse had not accounted the said goods with an intention to remove them without payment of duty violating the provisions of Central Excise Act and Rules 1944. The goods were seized under panchanama. During the course of further investigation, other discrepancies were also unearthed like unaccounted raw material, suppression of production, clandestine clearance of PVC pipes and und....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s. 12,01,184/- . A penalty of Rs. 3,00,296/- was imposed on the assesse under Rule 173 (Q) and 226 of Central Excise Rules, 1944 and also imposed a penalty of Rs. 12,92,749/- under Rule 209(A) / Rule 26 of Central Excise, Rules, 2001 on the Joint Managing Director, Shri M Naganna of MPL. 4. In the statement of facts it is submitted by the appellant that MPL is now a defunct company and it was sold to another company viz. M/s Sujala Pipes by APSFC in the year 2000. That the present appeal is being pursued by the successor company, though the previous company was taken over without liabilities as per BIFR ruling. 5. On behalf of the appellant, the Ld. Counsel Shri Y.Sreenivasa Reddy submitted that the excess stock found in the factory w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,184/- and the penalties imposed are moderate and reasonable. 7. I have heard both sides. 8. The appellants approached the Settlement Commission in regard to the show cause notice issued for demand of duty which was settled at Rs. 12,92,749/- and a penalty of Rs. 2,00 lakhs was also imposed. On perusal of the Final Order passed by Settlement Commission, it is seen that as the appellants had not prayed for settlement of the present show cause notice in the application, the Settlement Commission sent the matter back to the adjudicating Officer under Section 32L(1) of Central Excise Act,1944. The said provision states that the officer having jurisdiction to whom the case has been sent back shall thereupon dispose of the case in accordanc....