TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 100
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pees Fifty Thousand only) imposed on the Director, Shri Ravi J. Chheda under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. By no means it can be termed excessive. 16. in view of the above, the impugned order is modified to the extent of setting aside of confiscation of inputs and also confiscation of the final products and imposition of consequent redemption fines of Rs. 3,19,990/- (Rs Three Lakhs Nineteen Thousand Nine Hundred and Ninety only) each. Thus the appeal filed by M/s Sangli Aluminium Extrusions Pvt. Ltd., Sangli is partially allowed and the appeal of Shri Ravindra J. Chheda, Director is rejected." 1.2 Assistant Commissioner has vide his order in original under challenge before Commissioner (Appeal) held as follows: "41.1 In view of the above I pass the following order. ORDER 41.2 I disallow Cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 3,19,990/- (Rs. three lakhs nineteen thousand nine hundred ninety only) to M/s Sangli Aluminium Extrusion Pvt Ltd. under the provisions of Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11 A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The said amount of Rs. 3.19.990/- (Rs. three lakhs nineteen thousand nine hundred ninety only) already paid / reversed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 of Rs. 50,000/ - (Rs. fifty thousand only) on Shri Bhimsen B.Singh, Partner of M/s Nikhil Shipping Agency (Noticee no.5). 41.10 I impose penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 of Rs. 50,000/ - (Rs. fifty thousand only) on M/s Llakshya Container Carriers, Plot No.1040, Road No.11, Steel Market, Kalamboli, Navi Mumbai Noticee no.6). 41.11 I impose penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. fifty thousand only) on Shri Kashinath Ajabnararan Pandye, Partner of M/s Llakshya Container Carriers Noticee no.7). 41.12 The, Show cause notice issued under F. No. DEGCEI/MZU/I& ISB'/12(4)31/08/Pt-IX/1786 dtd. 05.03.2010 stands disposed, accordingly. 41.13 This order is issued without prejudice to any other subsequent action that may be taken under the Central Excise Act, 1944 or the Rules made there under or any other law for the time being in force in India." 2.1 Acting on intelligence Director General Central Excise Intelligence undertook the investigations in respect of the wrong availment of CENVAT Credit on Bills of entry (particularly CVD and education cess Credit of Rs. 3,19,990/- on Bill of Entr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ll of LCC and transport charges of Rs. 17000/- for Bill of Entry No.824646 dated 17/3/2005(container No. TAHU4477231, 1X 40) and No.824624 dated 17/3/2005 (Container No. TTNU9694955, 1X 40). (The transport charges of Rs. 17000/ suggests that the goods were not transported to Sangli because as per the statement of Shri Pandey the charge upto Ahmednagar was Rs. 22000/-) Docket No B.E. No. Container No Delivered at Transporter Bill no. and date /Transport Charges Transport charges 08 824624 dtd. 17/3/05 TTNU969 4955 1X 40 ft Ahmednagar LCC/MBI/200 dtd. 18/3/05 Rs. 17000/- 18 824646 dtd. 17/3/2005 TAHU447 7231 1X 40 ft Ahmednagar LCC/MBI/204 dtd.23/3/05 Rs. 17000/- 4.4 Shri Niten Maru, Director of Appellant 1 in his statement dated 09.03.2010 inter alia stated that he did his chartered accountancy in 2004. When he was asked to confirm the receipt of imported scrap under the said Bills of Entry, by way of any independent documents such as copy of any octroi receipt of any Municipal corporation, he stated that he did not have any such evidence but would produce if available by 12/3/2010. He did not appear thereafter and informed tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case. However, Shri Ravindra J. Chheda being Executive Director of SAEPL and working as a executive head of the company, he had full responsibility in daily happening at their premises and therefore, he is liable for imposition of penalty as proposed by the SCN." 4.9 Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 reads as follows: "(1) Any person who acquires possession of, or is in any way concerned in transporting, removing, depositing, keeping, concealing, selling or purchasing, or in any other manner deals with, any excisable goods which he knows or has reason to believe are liable to confiscation under the Act or these rules, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding the duty on such goods or two thousand rupees, whichever is higher." 4.10 Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has in case of Vijaya Steels Pvt Ltd [2012 (282) ELT 215 (Kar)] has after taking note of Rule 26, held as follows: "9. For application of the Rule, the condition precedent is any excisable goods which he knows or reason to believe are liable to confiscation under the Act or the Rules, then penalty is leviable under the aforesaid provision. 10. In the instant case, admittedly no excisable goods are confiscated. ....