TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 1455
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Poddar and Shri G.R. Singh, DRs for the respondents ORDER Per: B. Ravichandran These are 15 appeals involving identical dispute and hence are taken up together for decision. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of pattas/patties of Stainless Steel liable to central excise duty. During the period in dispute, the appellants were working under Compounded Levy Scheme in terms of Rule 15 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The said scheme envisages that the manufacturer has to discharge central excise duty on the goods manufactured by them, by making payment of a fixed amount as per the number of machines. Form Appendix-II is a document prescribed for making payment of the central excise duty. After payment of the applicable centra....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Appendix-II challans. The appellants are not involved in any fraudulent activity. They followed the procedure and visited the authorized bank and paid the applicable central excise duty. The stamped challans were also produced to the central excise officer. The department did not reconcile the duty paid challans with the bank documents, in time. As the appellants are not involved in any fraudulent activity, the demand for extended period cannot be invoked. 4. Ld. Counsel strongly urged that the entire fraud of mis-appropriation of Government duty has been committed within the bank premises, by one Shri Sachin in connivance with the bank officials. The appellants filed Police complaint. The Police Authorities conducted investigation.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecords. 9. The basic facts of the case are not in dispute. Admittedly, the duty liability on the goods has not been deposited to the Government as per the applicable Central Excise provisions. The appellant's only plea is that they are not party to the forgery and the Police case established that Shri Sachin along with some bank employees perpetuated the fraud. As the appellants have no role, they cannot be put to demand again. I find that the said submission makes the whole issue simplistic. The background facts of the case will not support such simplistic assertion. Admittedly, it is the Department, which had certain information regarding such fraudulent activity and based on that, initiated an inquiry. I do not find that the fai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oduced a fraud document claiming duty payment. The department is well within their right to proceed and recover the central excise duty, not paid to the Government. 11. The question of time bar was strongly pleaded by the appellant. I note that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Aafloat Textiles (I)(P)Ltd. - 2009 (235) ELT 587 (SC) examined a similar case with reference to submission of SILs, which were not genuine documents and were, infact, forged. The Hon'ble Apex Court held that since fraud was involved, in the eye of law, such documents had no existence. Since the documents have been established to be fraud or fake, obviously, the fraud was involved and that was sufficient to extend the period of limitation. 12. The T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s involved, in the eye of law such documents had no existence. Since the documents have been established to be forged or fake, obviously fraud was involved and that was sufficient to extend the period of limitation". 13. The appellants relied on the certain case laws. In Binani Cement Ltd. - 2010 (259) ELT 247 (Tribunal-Ahmd), the Tribunal was dealing with DEPB licence obtained by fraud. It is to be noted that the DEPB licence was issued by the competent authority, though on wrong representation. In the present case, the duty paid challan itself is a forged document. In HICO Enterprises - 2005 (189) ELT 135 (Tribunal-LB), the Tribunal was examining the endorsement of transferability made on licence obtained by fraud or mis-representation....