Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Ahmedabad REGIONAL BENCH- COURT NO.1 Excise Appeal No. 713 of 2010-SM (Arising out of OIO-03-COMMISSIONER-RKS-AHD-I-2010 Dated 03.02.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise-AHMEDABAD-I)

Brij Kishor Chodhary ........Appellant Prop Of M/s. Choudry Transport Co, Main Gate ICD, Tughlakabad, New Delhi VERSUS Commissioner of C.E.-Ahmedabad-I ........Respondent C. Ex Bhavan, Nr Panjrapole & Polytechnic, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380015 APPEARANCE:

Shri Dev Wadhwa & Shri Ankur Upadhayay, Advocates appeared for the Appellant Shri Sarjeet Kumar, Superintendent (AR) appeared for the Respondent CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. SATENDRA VIKRAM SINGH, MEMBER ( TECHNICAL )

FINAL ORDER NO. 10209/2026 DATE OF HEARING :11.12.2025 DATE OF DECISION:20.03.2026 SATENDRA VIKRAM SINGH

1. A case of evasion of Central Excise duty was detected against M/s. Shriram Tubes Pvt. Ltd. wherein, it was alleged that M/s. Shriram Tubes Pvt. Ltd. were engaged in illicit manufacture and clandestine clearance of excisable goods in the guise of job work goods under the cover of job work challans. After completing the investigation, show cause notice dated 26.10.2007 was issued to M/s. Shriram Tubes Pvt. Ltd. along with other co-noticees including the present appellant by the Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence (DGCEI), Ahmedabad. The above show cause notice was adjudicated by the Commissioner vide impugned order dated 03.02.2010 where among others, a penalty of Rs.12,00,000/- was imposed on the appellant Shri Brij Kishor Choudhary, Proprietor of M/s. Choudhary Transport, Tuglakabad, New Delhi. Among others, Shri Brij Kishor Choudhary also filed Appeal No. E/713/2010 before this Tribunal against the impugned order.

2. In their appeal, the appellant took the following grounds:-

• Learned Adjudicating Authority has imposed penalty by passing ex-parte order on the ground of non-filing of reply and non-appearance during personal hearing. In fact, they neither received the show cause notice nor any hearing notice, so they could not submit any reply. He also failed to follow judicial discipline as held by various Higher Forums like Hon’ble High Court and Tribunal before adjudication of the case. They rely on the decision of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of J. B. Textile Inds. Pvt. Ltd.

Vs. CCE, Thane-II reported at 2007 (219) ELT 458. • The appellant relies on the following decisions:-

a) Teksons Ltd. Versus Assistant Collector of Customs, Bombay Reported At 2004 (165) E.L.T. 17 (Bom.), b) Rajesh Agarwal Versus Commissioner of Customs, Shillong Reported At 2002 (147) E.L.T. 725 (Tri. - Kolkata), c) Mohammed Akbar Reported At 2002 (144) E.L.T. 726 (G.O.I.), d) Sheffield Appliances Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Cus., ICD, Tughlakabad Reported At 2001 (136) E.L.T. 953 (Tri. - Del.), e) Orkay Silk Mills Limited and Another Versus M.S. Bindra And Others Reported At 1988 (33) E.L.T. 48 (Bom.), • It has been alleged that he issued two bogus LRs showing transportation of 49,210 Kgs of copper ingots from ICD, Tughlaquabad to the factory of M/s. Shriram Tubes Pvt Ltd., Ahmedabad. Being a small transporter, they never knew that the LR’s would be used in relation to violation of any Central Excise Law.

• He has been penalized for abetment in fraudulent availment of Cenvat Credit by M/s. Shriram Tubes Pvt. Ltd which allegation is absolutely incorrect. Being merely a transporter, he cannot be presumed to be involved in abetting any manufacturer for taking irregular credit.

• There was no motive on his part nor any financial benefits had accrued to him in the case. He has been penalized on the grounds of presumption and surmises in absence of any direct and positive evidence against him.

The impugned order is contrary to various orders passed by the Tribunal and Hon’ble Courts as mentioned below:-

a) A. N. Waghbakriwala Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Ahmedabad Reported At 2009 (236) E.L.T. 147 (Tri. - Ahmd.), b) Vijay Tran