TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 1331
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ey did not obtain any Central Excise registration and enjoyed exemption under Central Excise Notification No. 8/2003- CE. Dated 01.03.2003. 2. One of the agencies with which the appellants are concerned for their trading activities was Shri Parshnath Re-rolling Mills Ltd (SPRML). It is on the strength of the investigations carried out at the premises of SPRML by DGCEI, that a show cause notice dated 16 March 2017, was issued to them proposing imposition of penalty for clandestinely procuring 543.15 MT of wire rods valued at Rs.2,33,67,271/- attracting central excise duty to the tune of Rs.26,94,687/-. The show cause notice also called for imposition of penalty on them under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. 3. The appellants have....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2.12, as were culled out of records -the computerized ledgers seized during the search at SPRML, showing the sales to the appellant. 4. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 5. It is seen from the voluntary statement of the proprietor, Shri Sanjay Agarwal, recorded on 11.3.14 that he has admitted to the fact of receipt of the said goods from SPRML without cover of a purchase invoice, for which payments were admittedly made in cash. The appellant further furnished details of the brokers and transporters of SPRML, through whom such deals were facilitated. The said statement recorded before the excise authorities contained wealth of information about the location and address of the brokers. As for the subsequent sale of the wire r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e user of said invoice or document is likely to take or has taken any ineligible benefit under the Act or the rules made thereunder like claiming of CENVAT credit under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 or refund, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding the amount of such benefit or five thousand rupees, whichever is greater.]." 7.1. It is an admitted position of the appellant in their statement referred to above which has not been retracted, that they had procured wire rods without cover of duty paid invoices from SPRML as reflected in the computerized ledgers, showing sales of wire rods, by SPRML to different parties and buyers including the appellants for the impugned period herein. 8. The appellants have thus confessed and admitted to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ently like paper records) evidencing supply of wire rods to the appellants. 3. The identification of other elements in the chain like brokers /transporters not only by the appellants but others investigated as well. The appellant admitting to purchase of wire rods from SPRML through the brokers. 4. The cash dealing staff of SPRML admitting to invoiceless sales, receipt of its payment in cash, and actual recovery of unexplained large amount of cash from the secret place searched by the department. 5. The appellants admitting to sell the manufactured goods out of the impugned wire rods purchased/received from SPRML without invoice in open market after realization of their profit element. 6. That the prime co-accused SPRML had in fact ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oner of Central Excise (Adj.) Mumbai 2014 (304) ELT 591 T, the Tribunal had held that even the sole statement, voluntary in nature, could be the basis of conviction. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of KI Pavunny Vs. Assistant Collector Central Excise, Cochin - 1997 (90) ELT-241 (S.C.) had held that confessional statement of accused, if found to be voluntary can from the sole basis of conviction. If not retracted the courts are not required to go into the truthfulness of the statements to ascertain whether they were obtained by co-ercion, threat or promise. Also in the case of Govindasamy Ragupathy [1998(98) ELT 50 Madras the Hon'ble Madras High Court had held that admitted facts were not required to be proved. Statements obtained without all....