2017 (5) TMI 646
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ltd., an 100% EOU for recovery of duty of Rs. 30,34,958/-, alleging illicit removal of the raw materials and finished goods from its premises without payment of duty and availing various export benefits; also it is proposed for penalty on the Appellant M/s Cosmic Textiles (P) Ltd and personal penalty on other co-noticees. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed with equal amount of penalty and personal penalty of Rs. 5.00 lakhs on Shri Rajendra Rajyaguru, Rs. 10.00 lakhs on Shri Mehul Lalji Satra, Rs. 10.00 lakhs on Shri Govindbhai D. Patel, Director had been imposed under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules 2002. Hence, the present appeals. 3. The learned Advocate Shri Mithil Dave for the Appellant M/s Cosmic Textiles (P) Ltd, Shri Mehul L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tificates, which ultimately decided in their favour by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals, on production of necessary evidences/certificates. He submits that the Show Cause Notice issued subsequently, the subject matter of the present appeal, was the outcome of the investigation by DGCEI officers against M/s Cosmic Textiles Pvt. Ltd. for alleged illicit removal of the goods from the factory without payment of appropriate duty and also availing various export benefits. Therefore, the plea taken by the learned Advocate for the Appellant M/s Cosmic Textiles Pvt. Ltd. and others that the case against the appellants had already been adjudicated earlier is devoid of merit and cannot be accepted. On the involvement of Shri Rajendra Rajyaguru in the com....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hout payment of duty and resorting into paper transaction to claim various export benefits. Thus, the present Show Cause Notice which was issued after detailed investigation of the persons concerned, transporters, brokers etc cannot be said to be arising out of the same set of facts. In the result, the plea taken by M/s Cosmic Textiles Pvt. Ltd. and its directors are hereby rejected as they have not challenged the findings on merit. In relation to the findings against Shri Rajendra Rajyaguru, the learned Commissioner observed as follows:- "38. Further, I also find that persons who had acted as broker had also played a major role in misleading the Department. All along, the two brokers involved had blamed each other as to the responsibility....
TaxTMI
TaxTMI