CONSOLIDATED COBALT CHEMICALS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANTS have a manufacturing unit in the Kandla Free Trade Zone (hereinafter referred to as KFTZ). They had been granted Domestic Tariff Area (hereinafter referred to as DTA) sales permission by the Development Commissioner during the period 1993 to 1995.

(2.) IN the present proceedings, the noticee has submitted written submission dtd 12/9/01. In the said submission the noticee has tried to mislead the department by stating that the said three certificates were not taken into account by the adjudicating authority. Infact, at the time of first adjudication all the three certificates were taken into consideration and references were made to ascertain the correctness of the above figures. Both the authorities i.e. the Development Commissioner, KFTZ and the Dy. Commissioner of Customs incharge KFTZ informed that the required value addition has not been achieved. Here I would like to refer letter dtd 31/12/96 (marked Annexure 3 of the submission made by the noticee) of the Development Commissioner, KFTZ, addressed to the party which clearly states that the value addition had been refixed at 21% with effect from 1/4/96. This aspect was never brought to the notice of the department and on the contrary the noticee had been contending that the value addition for the previous years prior to 1/4/96 was also 21%. The second issue to be decided is of limitation. It is clear that the noticee has tried to mislead and suppress the correct value addition for the relevant period in order to avail the required DTA sales with the benefit of concessional notification. Thus, the proviso to Section 11A of the Act where the material facts have been suppressed is attached against the noticee to demand the duty on the goods which have been cleared availing the benefit of concessional rate of duty, although the same was not available to them.

(3.) AS regards imposition of penalty, the noticee is liable for penalty for suppression of material facts with an intent to avail the benefit of notification granting exemption and thus evade the payment of duty. & Ordered the confirmation of duty demand of Rs. 25,25,115/ - under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act 1944 & imposed a penalty of equivalent amount under Section 11AC. Hence the appeal.