Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Global Spin Weave Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 16 September, 2005
Equivalent citations: 2006(193)ELT478(TRI-DEL)
ORDER
S.S. Kang, Vice-President
1. When the matter was called, none appeared on behalf of the appellant. Therefore, the appeals are being taken up in the absence of the appellant. Heard the learned SDR also.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Bulk Drugs (Paracetamol). On 24-2-1998, the officers of the revenue visited factory of the appellants and during the verification, batch register and loose papers showing clearance of the goods were recovered from Shri R.S. Chauhan, Factory Manager and Shri Dinesh Tyagi, Cashier. During the verification of the stock, it was also found that inputs on which credit has been taken were found short. Show cause notice was issued demanding duty which was calculated on the basis of clearances mentioned in the batch register and in the private records. Modvat credit availed on the inputs were found short was disallowed. Adjudicating authority confirmed the duty and imposed equal amount of penalty under Section 11 AC of the Central Excise Act and also imposed penalty on Shri R.S. Chauhan, Factory Manager. The contention of the appellant in the appeal memo is that the demand cannot be raised on the basis of entries made in the batch register and loose papers which were recovered from the premises of the appellant. The contention is that there is no evidence regarding entries made in the loose papers to show that these entries relate to the production by the appellant. It was also not on record as to who prepared the said papers and in what connection? It is also contended in the appeal memo that there is no evidence on record to show that the goods were ever cleared to any customer without payment of duty.
3. The contention of the Revenue is that the entries made in the batch register showing the quantity of the goods which were produced and in the loose papers which were recovered from the pocket of Shri D.S. Tyagi, also regarding the production of goods. The entries made in the loose papers showing production of goods were tallied with entries made in the batch register. These two entries were not reflected in the RG-1 record. In the circumstances, the private records and batch register, which were recovered from the premises of the appellant, show the higher production than show in the statutory record. We find no merit in the appeals. Shri R.S. Chauhan, Factory Manager who is in-charge of manufacture and clearance of goods is also responsible to pay appropriate duty regarding clearance of the goods produced which were not cleared on payment of duty. Therefore, we find no interference in the impugned order in respect of the penalty imposed on the Factory Manager. The appeals are dismissed.
Dictated and pronounced in open Court