Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Tamil Nadu
M/S Elgi Rubber Products Ltd. vs C.C.E. Chennai-Iii on 16 March, 2001
ORDER
Shri VK Agrawal
1. This appeal has been filed by M/s Elgi Rubber Products Ltd who are aggrieved with the Order in Appeal No. 225/98 dated 29.12.98 confirming imposition of penalty, demand of duty and confiscation of goods and consequential redemption fine in respect of clearance of goods without entering in the RG-1 register and without debiting in the PLA/RG-23A..
2. Shri J. Sankararaman, learned Counsel submitted that on account of the Excise Clerk being on leave and the new man to whom the work was assigned was not well conversant with the Excise, procedure, these mistake have happened. He, however, emphasised that there was no mala fide intention inasmuch as the Excise invoices were prepared in which the amount of duty was clearly shown. He also drew my attention to the fact that there was no shortage of finished goods as after the reconciliation, the Excise offices found that these were tallying with the respective clearances. He therefore, submitted that lenient view is required to be taken as it cannot be alleged that there was any clandestine removal of the excisable goods.
3. Opposing the prayer. Shri GS Menon, learned SDR, submitted that non maintenance of the statutory accounts and clearances of goods without payment of duty has been admitted. The provisions of law are very specific that no excisable goods shall be removed without determining the duty amount and payment of the same. He finally mentioned that the value of the goods seized which were not accounted for four-five days Rs.90,820/- a redemption fine of Rs 23000/- has only been imposed. Similarly amount of penalty imposed for various offences is only nominal penalty and no further reduction is called for.
4. I have considered the submissions of both the sides. Appellants have admitted that the goods were not entered into the Statutory registers which is a requirement under Rule 53 of the CE Rules. They have also not disputed the clearance of goods without making debit entry in the PLA/RG 23A. Payment of duty before the clearance of goods in a statutory requirement and the mere fact that invoices had been prepared showing the amount of duty involved,will not be sufficient to satisfy the requirement of law. A penalty of Rs 5,000/- has been imposed in respect of goods valued at Rs 55,226/- cleared without payment of duty. The amount of penalty in my view is not harsh at all, As the excisable goods were not entered int he RG-1 register, The goods are liable for confiscation. However, taking into account the circumstances, which the production could not be entered, further leniency is called for in determining the redemption fine. I therefore, reduce the redemption fine from Rs. 23,000/- to Rs 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand). Another penalty of Rs 2000- which has been imposed on account of shortage is set aside as the appellants have contended that the offices did not take into consideration the clearances effected during the same period. Another penalty of Rs.1000/- has been imposed as duty paid goods were retained inside the factory without obtaining permission. I do not find any reason to interfere with imposition of this penalty. The appeal is accordingly disposed of in the above terms.
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court)