M.M.Kumar, J.

1. The pristine question raised in this appeal is whether statements made under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 are admissible in evidence to sustain penalty under the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The assessee has filed the instant appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for brevity, #24;the Act#25;), challenging order dated 17-5-2006, passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for brevity, #24;the Tribunal#25;), in Appeal No. Excise/1053/2004, upholding the order-in-original dated 10-12-2003, passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana, whereby invoking proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Act, demand of duty of Rs. 59,79,963/- (Rs. 54,99,963/- + Rs. 4,80,000/-) has been raised. The assessee-appellant has also been held liable for penal action for violations of Rule 9(1), 52A, 173F, 173C, 53 read with Rule 173G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (for brevity, #24;the Rules#25;). Accordingly, a penalty of Rs. 59,79,963/- has been imposed under Rule 173Q of the Rules read with Section 11AC of the Act. Further the assessee-appellant has been ordered to pay interest on the duty demanded, under th