Shiv Kripa Ispat (P. ) Ltd. VS Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Nasik

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

P.G.CHACKO, K.K.AGARWAL, A.K.SRIVASTAVA
Shiv Kripa Ispat (P. ) Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Nasik – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
D.H. Nadkarni, A.V. Ansukhan, A. Janakiram,A.K. Prasad

ORDER

Per P.G. Chacko : The issues referred to this bench in the two appeals being similar, we have taken up both the cases for joint hearing.

2. Facts of the Excise Appeal:

(i) The appellants in this appeal were engaged in the manufacture of MS/CTD bars falling under Chapter 72 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act. From the results of investigations into their operations, it appeared that they had been removing the excisable goods clandestinely without payment of Central Excise duty. In fact, the Factory Manager, in his statement dated 21.02.2006 recorded under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, confessed to clandestine removal of MS bars of different sizes valued at Rs. 2,04,679/- to one M/s. Hari Om Steels on 06.02.2006. He also volunteered to pay duty on such goods. In a subsequent show-cause notice, the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner proposed:

(a) to demand duty of Rs. 33,404/- from the appellants under Section 11A (1) of the Central Excise Act and appropriate the amount already paid, towards such demand;

(b) to confiscate the above goods under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002; and

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

P.G.CHACKO, K.K.AGARWAL, A.K.SRIVASTAVAShiv Kripa Ispat (P. ) Ltd. – AppellantVersusCommissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Nasik – Respondent

P.G.CHACKO, K.K.AGARWAL, A.K.SRIVASTAVA
Shiv Kripa Ispat (P. ) Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Nasik – Respondent