The Commissioner, Central Excise And Central Gst Versus M/s Kurele Chemical Co.,
Central Excise
2019 (2) TMI 671 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2019 (366) E.L.T. 657 (All.)
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 5-2-2019
Central Excise Appeal No. – 24 of 2018
Central Excise
Bharati Sapru And Piyush Agrawal JJ.
For the Appellant : Gaurav Mahajan
For the Respondent : Prateek Dawar,Pragya Pandey,Prateek Dawar
ORDER
PIYUSH AGRAWAL, J.
We have heard Sri Gaurav Mahajan, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Suyash Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondent assessee.
Present appeal has been filed against the order No. A/70730-70734/ 2017-EX (DB) dated 24.7.2017 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Regional Bench, Allahabad in which the following questions of law have been framed:
(1)Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case the Tribunal has erred in law to hold that the clandestine manufacture and removal of final product is n
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Agency, Kanpur or documents recovered from the business premises of M/s K.P. Pan Flavours, Kanpur or from the business premises of M/s Ashwini Tobacco Pvt. Ltd. On the basis of the aforesaid bilties and GRs it was concluded by the appellant- department that the Gutlka manufactured by the respondent assessee were transported to Etawah, Farrukhabad and Kayamganj through M/s Vinod Forwarding Agency and the same were cleared to the aforesaid destinations without payment of Central Excise duty.
On the basis of the alleged recovery of documents from the aforesaid parties a show cause notice/demand dated 13.6.2008 was issued to the respondent assessee by the Director General, DGCEI, DZU, New Delhi. It was also alleged that during the survey dated 30.5.2006 at the business premises of the respondent assessee a cash of Rs. 7,90,000/- was confiscated on the alleged ground that the said money related to be sale proceeds of clandestinely cleared Gutkha. It was further alleged that no proper docu
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Act) and equal amount of penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Section 11AC of the Act. It has further directed for the appropriation of the amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- voluntarily deposited on 3.6.2006. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax, Kanpur the respondent assessee preferred an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Regional Bench, Allahabad. The Tribunal vide the impugned order dated 24.7.2017 has allowed the appeal and set aside the demand of interest and penalty.
Against the impugned order present appeal has been preferred by the appellant- Revenue.
We have perused the record. It shows that the entire show cause notice has been based on bilties/GRs claimed to have been recovered from M/s Vinod Forwarding Agency, Kanpur. It further reveals that the goods transported by M/s Vinod Forwarding Agency, name of the manufacturer, have not been stated on the alleged GRs and its br
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
of manufacturers of Gutkha without connecting the GRs with the goods manufactured by the particular assessee on the basis of particulars of goods stated in the GRs. It was also noticed by the Tribunal in the impugned order that there was no investigation conducted about procurement of raw material of allegedly clandestinely cleared goods.
The Tribunal has also come to the conclusion that there is no question of clandestine removal of goods without payment of duty. Moreover the bilties/GRs which were recovered from the transporter, M/s Vinod Forwarding Agency and were lying with the Revenue were being used for issuing show cause notice without conducting any investigation.
In view of the aforesaid finding of facts recorded by the Tribunal we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order.
The present appeal lacks merit and is hereby dismissed. The questions of law are answered accordingly in favour of the respondent assessee and against the Department.
Case laws, Decisions, Judg
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =