TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 732
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....horities vide which demand of duty of Rs. 42,56,777/- stands confirmed against M/s.AKona Engg. Pvt.Ltd., Ghaziabad along with confirmation of interest and imposition of penalty of identical amount in terms of section 11AA of the Central Excise Act. Further he has confiscated the excisable goods totally valued at Rs. 4.35 crores with an option to the appellant to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 43,58,626/-. Further penalty of Rs. 10.00 Lakhs stands imposed upon M/s.Akona Engg. Pvt.Ltd., Roorke in terms of the provisions of Rule 26 Central Excise Rules along with penalty of Rs. 5.00 Lakh upon Shri Rambharose Rathod, Managing Director of Ghaziabad unit. 2. As per facts on record M/s.Akona Engg. Pvt.Ltd. located at Ghazi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from Roorkee/Ghaziabad units appellants Ghaziabad unit were served with a show cause notice dated 30.01.2014 in which it was alleged that:- - Though the receipt of inputs/raw materials were found duly entered in the stock register at Roorkhee unit, they have not shown the corresponding bill (excise invoice) for finished goods in which these were used as has been done in one case of MRB engineering. - internal gate passes were not prepared in respect of some excise invoices and in respect thereof corresponding entry of essential parts used in the clearance of finished goods like air compressor, gear box, motor, control panel etc. were not reflected in the stock register of such inputs; - In respect of four invoice....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nalty of Rs. 10 lakhs on the Roorkhee Unit under Rule 26(2)(i). d) Penalty of Rs. 5 Lakhs on Shri Ram Bharose Rathod under Rule 26. 5. The Learned Appellate Commissioner upheld the Oder-in-original. But set aside the redemption fine imposed on the ground that when the goods were not available for confiscation, redemption fine was not imposable. 6. The present appeal is against the impugned order in appeal for setting aside the duty demand and the penalties. 7. After hearing both sides duly represented by Shri R. Krishnan, learned Advocate for the Appellant and Shri Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi, learned Dy.Commissioner (A.R.) for the Revenue, we find that the duty stands confirmed against the Ghaziabad unit of the appellant on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....duced by the Revenue in the shape of statements of transporters of the goods or the identification of the buyers. There was also no shortage of raw materials at Roorkee unit, thus indicating that the documents maintained at Roorkee unit were perfect. The appellants have also taken a stand that the clearances from Roorkee unit were being effected both for local customers and for customers outside the state. They had produced a statement before the adjudicating authority indicating invoice wise details showing clearances against 'C' forms, Form No.38 and GR numbers. For supplies to the customers in Uttar Pradesh, road permits were required and permit numbers were indicated in all the excise invoices. These facts are sufficient enough to estab....