ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, RAJESH BINDAL
Commissioner Of Central Excise – Appellant
Versus
Machino Montell (I) Ltd. – Respondent
1. The respondent is a manufacturer of polypropylene compounding falling under Chapter heading(39 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. It was noticed that for the years ending 31-3-1997, 31-3-1998 and 31-3-1999, forged entries were shown in RG-I register. Show cause notice dated 19-6-2001 was issued under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short "the Act"), requiring the assessee to show cause why additional duty and penalty be not imposed.
2. After considering the view point of the assessee, the adjudicating authority held that the party had clandestinely removed finished goods without issue of invoice and without payment of duty. Interest and penalty was levied thereon wilfully and intentionally evading payment of duty. The said duty was however, deposited without any protest on 23-5-2001 prior to the show cause notice dated 19-6-2001. The adjudicating authority concluded as under:
I come to the unmistakable conclusion that the differential quantity has been surreptitiously removed without following the prescribed Central Excise procedure and without payment of duty. In view of this I hold that the sum of Rs. 1,12,900/- demanded from the n
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.