2019 (7) TMI 1173

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uring the disputed period, the Central Excise department gathered information that the appellant No.1 had manufactured and removed the final product clandestinely to M/s The Brihan Mumbai Electric Supply & Transport Undertaking (BEST) without payment of Central Excise duty and that the goods were removed under simple delivery challans, without accompanying with Central Excise invoices. It was also observed by the department that the appellant No.1 had one more unit manufacturing similar goods, under brand name 'Braco', which was not declared to the Central Excise department. The intelligence report of department had confirmed that clandestine removal of goods had resulted in evasion of Central Excise duty and that the SSI exemption ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Central Excise Act, 1944. 1.4 The learned adjudicating authority has mainly recorded the following findings in support of confirmation of the adjudged demands against the appellants: (a) The Appellant No. 1 did not submit any evidence to show that the sales effected to BEST was purely trading in nature and not removal of final products from the factory. In this context, description furnished in the purchase orders was referred to in the impugned order. (b) The good were removed in clandestine manner and in contravention of the provisions of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. (c) The private registers/documents etc. maintained by the appellant proved the fact that the goods were clandestinely removed without pa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rsons, whose statements were recorded under summon have not specifically stated that the subject goods were removed from the factory without payment of central excise duty. The learned Advocate also contended that the value of goods exported through merchant exporter have not been excluded from the value of goods arrived at by the department for computation of the adjudged duty demand. Thus, the learned Advocate pleaded that the charge of clandestine removal solely based on the private records cannot be sustained for confirmation of the adjudged demands. In this context, the learned Advocate has relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Balajee Structural Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Raipur-2016 (341) ELT 457 (Tri.-Del.) and CCE, Raipu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... considered by the adjudicating authority inasmuch as no such findings were recorded by him in the impugned order. In the reply to show cause notice dated 03.04.2002, the appellant no.1 had submitted the evidences of exports with statutory documents and the remittances received by it towards exportation of goods. However, the adjudged demands were confirmed on the basis of private records, without proper co-relation of the data of actual export and value of alleged clandestine removal of goods. The information furnished by the appellants regarding the waste and scrap sent for job work for recycling and the duty paid goods supplied to BEST were also not properly addressed in the impugned order. The department had not adduced any material evi....