TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 1165
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y Commissioner, Central Excise & Customs, Raipur whereunder inter alia Central Excise duties of Rs. 5,44,15,015/-, along with interest and equivalent penalty has been confirmed against the appellant assessee, M/s Ghankun Steel Pvt. Ltd.; a penalty of Rs. One crore has been imposed on the appellant Shri Narayan Gupta. Further, a penalty of Rs. one lakh each inter alia has been imposed on other two appellants namely Shri Ram Rolling Mill, M/s Shri Hanuman Loha Pvt. Ltd. Penalty of Rs. one lakh each also imposed on M/s Sunvijay Rolling & Engineering Ltd. and M/s Purwanchal Road Carriers but they are not the appellants in the present proceedings. 2.(i) The brief facts are that the appellant M/s Ghankun Steels Pvt. Ltd. is engaged in the manu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....., heard Shri Manish Saharan, ld. Advocate. Revenue has also been heard as represented by ld. AR, Shri G.R. Singh. 4. The main contentions on behalf of the appellants M/s Ghankun Steels Pvt. Ltd. and its Director, Shri Narayan Gupta are that in case of demand of Rs. 5,35,10,738/-, it is based exclusively on the premise that the power consumption in the factory has been varying throughout the period, and in the months, where it exceeds 830 KWH (units) PMT, excess goods have been manufactured and removed clandestinely; the figure of 830 units (KW) PMT has been arbitrarily arrived at and no basis, whatsoever, has been provided, for the same in the show cause notice; no expert testimony or any report has been relied upon by the department to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the department for clandestine removal of 346.100 MT sponge iron has a number of discrepancies. 5. In the case of the appellant Shri Hanuman Loha Pvt. Ltd., the ld. Advocate Shri Manish Saharan has inter alia mentioned that their name has not appeared in the proceedings in the documents mentioned in the show cause notice and they cannot be related to the case proceedings. 5.1 In the case of the appellant Shri Ram Rolling Mills, ld. Advocate Shri Kumar Vikram, inter alia mentions that they are only the exporter of the assessee M/s Ghankun Steels; charges against them cannot be proved based on third party record. There are no incriminating documents against them and considering the CESTAT decision in the case of Steel Tubes India Ltd. V....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce of loading), description of goods, name of the consignee (place of unloading), rate (value per MT), total amount received from the consignee of the goods, amount paid in cheques as well as in cash against despatches of sponge iron and MS ingot by the assessee, M/s Ghankun Steels Pvt. Ltd. The details of transportation of sponge iron and MS ingot undertaken and recorded by the Noticee No. 2, M/s Purwanchal Road Carriers in their records, when reconciled with the sales details the assessee, it was revealed that sales invoices in respect of 346.100 MT of sponge iron and 268.320 MT of MS ingot had not been issued by the assessee. The details of the transportation of such goods were recorded in the books of Noticee No. 2, M/s Purwanchal Road ....