TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1428
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....EXCUS-000-APP031-TO-033-2018-19 dated 23.04.2018 wherein, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) had rejected his appeal and upheld the order of the lower authority. The entire matter arose from the search conducted at premises of the appellant by the departmental officers on 12.09.2012 wherein, they recovered various incriminating records/ diaries which contained daily transaction carried out by the appellant that included sale of round/ CTD bars purchased from various re-rolling mills including clandestine purchase/ sales/ removal of goods. 1.1 The officers recorded the statements dated 26.09.2012 and 02.04.2013 of the appellant wherein he explained the details noted in resumed documents including details of sellers and buyers of those cla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the same was not provided to them. They had also raised this issue in their appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who also ignored their request and passed the order in their appeal. Therefore, both the orders are violative of the principles of Natural Justice. * The appellant is not liable to any penalty as he has neither purchased nor dealt with alleged goods and has merely acted as a broker. He requests that the appeal filed before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) may also be treated as a part of the present appeal before this Tribunal. * The appellate Commissioner has at para 11.1 held that the details of clandestine transactions recorded in the diary/ notebook seized from the appellant's premises contained detail....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nal penalty on the Director was not sustainable in the light of following judgments:- a) Shri V.K. Aggarwal and Shri J.K. Aggarwal v. CCE, New Delhi - 2023 (9) TMI 178 - CESTAT NEW DELHI b) M/s. Siemens Ltd. (formerly known as M/s. Morgan Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd.), Mr. Sunil Chellani Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III - 2023 (5) TMI 377 - CESTAT-Mumbai c) Shri B.V. Kshatriya Vs. Commissioner of GST & CE, Nashik - 2023 (5) TMI 858 - CESTAT Mumbai d) Mr. Dinesh Kanoria Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane-I - 2022 (12) TMI 1408 - CESTAT Mumbai e) Shri Ramesh Despande and Shri Debdutta Chatterjee Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur - 2021 (7) TMI 1307 - CESTAT - Mumbai ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ne purchase/sales of goods. These records also contained daily transactions either in code names or in abbreviated form which the appellant explained during interrogation. He also explained contents of the seized documents as elaborated in the body of the show cause notice. For example, documents mentioned at Sr. No.3,4,5 and 15 contain details pertaining to rate of CTD bars/ TMT bars required by the customers and obtained from various re-rolling mills. This as per him was done on daily basis to ensure availability of goods to his customers at the most reasonable rates. In his further statements dated 02.04.2013, the appellant explained that steel bars and Flats/ Patti/ Patta purchased and loaded in a vehicle from rolling mill were not unlo....