COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. KESHAVAN GOKULAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question, as proposed by the appellant, admittedly does not arise out of the impugned order of the Tribunal in case of the respondent assessee. Hence, the learned counsel for the appellant has re-framed the question which reads as under :

(2.) IT appears that, against the Limited Company, wherein the assessee is serving as Manager, certain proceedings were taken and as a consequence, after drawing of a panchnama on 16/17-12-1998, statement of respondent assessee was recorded on 17. 12. 1998 under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. After issuing a consolidated notice, the adjudicating authority made an Order-in-Original on 31st March, 2004, whereunder an order of confiscation came to be made against the Company under Rule 173q (1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (the Rules) and also granted an option to redeem the confiscated goods by paying redemption fine of Rs. 1,73,425/-; demand of duty of Rs. 4,63,095/- was also raised under Rule 9 (2) of the Rules; there were further amounts demanded and penalty of Rs. 7,71,153/- was imposed upon the Company under Rule 173q (1) of the Rules. Confiscation of land, building, plant, machinery etc. was also ordered. A penalty of Rs. 50,000/- came to be imposed upon respondent assessee under Rule 209a of the Rules. Ultimately, the matter reached Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad (the Tribunal) by way of appeals filed by the Company and its employees, including the present respondent.

(3.) IN relation to the personal penalties imposed on the officers of the Company, the Tribunal recorded the following finding :