Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Aslam Abdul Kadir Kapadia, S.T. ... vs Commissioner Of Customs & Central ... on 2 May, 2003
ORDER Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)
1. The applications for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 7,26,914/- and penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs imposed upon the partnership firm and Rs. 1 lakh imposed upon the authorised signatory of the firm, arise out of the order of the Commissioner Central Excise (Appeals) who has upheld the adjudication order which holds that the applicants clandestinely manufactured and cleared a quantity of 10,026,393 kgs., of crimped yarn as noted in the private records but did not reflect the same in the Central Excise records and therefore these goods have escaped payment of duty.
2. On hearing both sides and nothing the plea advanced that during some part of the period in dispute the rough register showed lesser production than that reflected in the Central Excise records while in some part of the period the entries in the rough registers showed excess production when compared to the Central Excise records, nothing the plea of financial hardship and the reply of the learned SDR that the material on record consists of more than one piece of evidence, namely, rough register, non-accountal in statutory records and also statements of the authorised signatory and other two lady partners, and noting his submission that the financial position cannot be taken to be the correct and real one from the documents produced, and in view of the finding of the adjudicating authority that the plea of the applicants that the two lady partners had instructed Shri Aslam Kapadia to clandestinely produce and clear the goods is not correct, I am of the view that prima facie case for total waiver has not been made out by the applicant. Therefore, keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances, I direct pre-deposit of a sum of Rs. 3.5 lakhs towards duty within a period of 12 weeks from today and on such deposit pre-deposit of balance duty as well as penalties shall stand waived and recovery thereof stayed pending these appeals.
3. Failure to comply with this direction shall result in vacation of stay and rejection of the appeals without prior notice.
4. Compliance to be reported on 8th August, 2003.