2017 (3) TMI 1200

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the show cause notice. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, basing upon intelligence that RAV's Steel (P) Ltd (RSPL, for short) is indulging in clandestine production and clearance of sponge iron lumps and Fines, the officers of the Department intercepted four lorries bearing Nos. (1) AP 05 TA 8449 (2) AP 26 TT 6489, (3) AP 05 TA 8269 and (4) AP 26 TT 3569, near RSPL factory. As the vehicles did not carry way bill or invoices regarding the goods carried by them, the goods were seized. Thereafter, show cause notice was issued to RSPL and the respondents herein. After adjudication, the original authority confiscated the total quantity of 111.500 MT of sponge iron valued at Rs. 24,64,150/- carried in four lorries, giving an option to RS....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... fine and penalty against them. The Tribunal vide Final Order No. 27173/2013 had reduced the redemption fine from Rs. 3 lakhs to Rs. 30,000/- and the penalty imposed was also reduced from Rs. 3 lakhs to Rs. 30,000/-. RSPL had contended that their daily stock register was maintained properly and that there is no evidence to establish clandestine removal of goods. Non issuance of invoice was explained by them stating that the vehicles were intercepted within 10 kms after removal of the goods from the factory and the invoices were kept at the Head Office in Bellary and were yet to be brought for issuing the invoices. Meanwhile, the vehicles had started on the instructions of Sh. T. Sudarshan babu, Manager of M/s. Lalithambika Enterprises who h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Tribunal in the Final Order No. 27173/2013 also worth reproducing. "4. I have considered the submissions made by both the sides. I feel that in this case it may not be necessary for me to go into all the legal issue and precedent decisions. This is in view of the fact that the ofence is limited to transportation of 111.5 MTs of sponge iron. There is no evidence to show clandestine removal earlier and there is no demand for earlier period in this case. Moreover, pule 10 has not been invoked and this goes in favour of the appellant to some extent. At this stage, the Bench asked both sides that is there any objection to dispose of appeal at this stage itself Both sides agree. In my opinion, the imposition of redemption fine and penalty i....