TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 1081
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts, manufactured by M/s Venus Casting Pvt. Ltd./Venus Loha Udyog Ltd. to his firm. 3. The brief facts of the case are that appellant is a trading firm involved in the trading of Iron & Steel Scrap and Pig Iron and not registered with the Central Excise Department. Further, the officers of DGCEI indicated that certain persons namely M/s Venus Casting Pvt. Ltd, M/s Venus Loha Udyog Ltd. and M/s Venus Enterprises were engaged in evasion of Central Excise duty by manufacturing and clandestinely/removal of MS Ingots, without payment of duty. Acting on this intelligence, the officers of DGCEI searched the premises of abovementioned persons and of transporters and certain records were seized. Further, during the scrutiny of the records recovered it has been observed that the above-mentioned persons had shown receipt of large quantity of pig iron in their factory premises. Ongoing through the cenvatable invoices of Pig Iron, it was observed that the abovementioned persons showing receipt of Pig Iron in their factory at Sumerpur from Agra. Further, subsequent investigations were made at the end of traders/manufacturers of Pig Iron and of transporters. From the investigation the Department ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Department invoked extended period of Limitation under proviso to Section 11A (1) of Central Excise Act, 1944. 4. The appellant contested the show cause notice by filing the reply, as follows:- "4.1. The show cause notice did not cite any evidence that M/s Apparent Iron and Steel, Goa had consigned pig iron to M/s Venus Loha Udyog, through the Appellant. 4.2. The appellant had received number of consignments of MS Ingots under proper central excise invoices showing payment of duty from M/s Venus Loha Udyog, Hamirpur. Payments for these consignments had been made through Bank cheques. 4.3 The invoices, where under MS Ingots had been received by appellant have not been found to be fake/fabricated/manipulated, it is unlawful to allege that we had not received MS Ingots from M/s Venus Loha Udyog Ltd. The invoices are the statutory documents showing payment of duty and cannot be rejected for any reason. 4.4 The allegation that the appellant had sold pig iron of M/s Venus Loha Udyog Ltd. at Agra was purely hypothetical, imaginary and presumptive. The investigating officer had not cited a single instance i.e. name of the party etc. to whom pig iron was sold by Shri Goyal. It....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appellants may be dropped. 4.9 However, the learned Commissioner did not agree with the various submissions and case laws cited by the appellants and is of the view that the appellant was the proprietor of M/s Goyal Iron and Steel Works India, Agra and he was instrumental in selling of pig iron at Agra which was consigned to M/s Venus Casting Pvt. Ltd./M/s Venus Loha Udyog Ltd. and the amount received from the sale of pig iron was returned to the above mentioned firms by him by showing bogus purchases of MS ingots, purportedly manufactured by above mentioned persons and sold to his firm and the appellant in his defence stated that he received a number of consignment of MS Ingots under proper central excise invoices from M/s Venus Loha Udyog Ltd., Hamirpur and payments for these consignments were also made through Bank Cheques. Regarding the contention of the appellant that unless the invoices issued in favour of the appellant by M/s Venus Loha Udyog ltd. were found to be illegal document, no penalty could be imposed on him under Rule 209A/26 of Central Excise Rules, and his purchase of MS Ingots could not be termed as bogus, the learned Commissioner has held that the contention....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ure, coercion. (E) That the learned Commissioner has committed a grave error by simply relying upon the retracted statement of the appellant for the purpose of imposing penalty. It is a settled principle of Law that the person cannot be held liable merely on the basis of confessional statement unless corroborated by other evidence in material particulars. (F) That the learned Commissioner failed to appreciate that there is no material evidence on record to show that M/s Apparent Iron & Steel, Goa had consigned Pig Iron to M/s Venus Loha Udyog, through the appellant. (G) That the learned Commissioner failed to appreciate the material on record that the appellant had received a number of consignments of MS Ingots under proper Central Excise Invoices showing payment of duty from M/s Venus Loha Udyog Ltd., Hamirpur and payments of these consignments were made through proper banking channels and the MS Ingots which the appellant received from M/s Venus Loha Udyog Ltd. were sold in the market by the appellant. The learned Commissioner committed a mistake by not properly evaluating the chart showing details of the Invoices under which MS Ingots had been received from M/s Venus Loha ....