TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 1427
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (hereinafter referred to as "JBSE") along with imposition of penalty of Rs. 3,00,000 (Rupees Three Lakhs only) imposed under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944 along with imposition of penalty of Rs. 20,000/- [Rupees Two Thousand only] stand imposed on them in terms of Rule 226 of the said rules. Further penalty of Rs. 60,000/- [Rupees Sixty Thousand only]stand Imposed on the other appellant Shri Ashok Saraf, Managing Director of JBSE under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2. As per facts on records M/s. JBSE is engaged in the manufacture of M.S. Ingots falling under Chapter 72 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Their factory was visited by the Central Excise officers on 12.11.1990, who conducted various chec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the statement of the Quality Controller Shri Jacbo Raja of M/s. Sree Ganesh Steel Rolling Mills to whom the clandestinely removed goods were supplied. 3.1 During the course of investigation, statement of Shri R.S. Mishra, Supervisor of the said appellant as also of Shri Sadasivam Pillai, Security Officer was recorded, wherein, they admitted to have cleared the goods mentioned in the said Private Gate Passes as also in the Outgoing Material Register, without payment of duty. It was also seen that during the year 1988-89 and 1990-91, the appellant had received a sizeable quantity of raw material i.e., Waste and Scrap, which was not entered in the statutory records. 4. Based upon the evidences collected by Revenue, proceeding....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the entire case of the Revenue is based upon the excess receipt of the raw materials i.e., Waste and Scrap. He has produced a chart explaining the discrepancies pointed out by the Revenue in respect of waste and scrap. Learned advocate submits that unaccounted raw material received by them during the period 1998-99 to 2000-01 was to the extent 6695.785 Metric Tonnes. They had already produced before the adjudicating authority the break-up of the said scrap along with the treatment of the same. According to the learned advocate, the said excess is on account of the fact that certain double entries were made in the private records as regards receipt of the scrap. Further, a part of the scrap received by them were cleared "as such" and acco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....all the relevant facts such as date of dispatch, description of goods, weight of the material, parties name and dispatch challan nos. etc. The said entries also stand accepted not only by the Managing Director but also by other representatives of the appellants. The appellant, at no stage have disputed the said entries and have not raised any arguments as to why the same should not be taken as entries of clandestine removal. In absence of any challenge to the said entries, the findings arrived at by the adjudicating authority cannot be held to be perverse. Accordingly, he prays for upholding the order and rejecting the appeals. 7. In his rejoinder, learned advocate Shri G. Natarajan, When questioned about the entries in the "Outgoi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... no consequence. 9. The contention of the appellant that the duty demand stands raised on the basis of the unaccounted and unexplained excess raw material is not factually correct. The reference to the unaccounted raw material is only with an intention to corroborate the allegation and charge of clandestine manufacture and removal of the final product. On going through the order, I find that the findings of the adjudicating authority are based upon the entries in the private records and not on the basis of the excess raw, materials. As such, the explanation rendered by the appellant in respect of such excess raw materials is of no consequence as long as the appellant have not explained the entries made in the "Private Gate Passes" ....