ASSTT. COMMR., C. EX., SATARA Vs. SETTL. COMM.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition by the Revenue challenges an order dated 27th Jan., 2005 of the Settlement Commission.

(2.) The first respondent-Commission exercises powers in terms of the Central Excise Act, 1944. This is a Commission set up to bring about settlement of cases and which fall within the parameters of the statutory provisions. The second respondent is an entity to whom the immunity has been granted in terms of the order passed by the Commission and therefore, is a necessary party. The petition is filed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Satara Division, Satara alleging that the second respondent is the holder of Central Excise registration. It is a manufacturer of rolled steel products, namely, TMT Bars falling under Chapter 714 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. These TMT Bars are manufactured out of ingot procured either from open market or manufactured within their factory itself.

(3.) Since there was a suspicion about the activities of the second respondent, a search was carried out at its office premises and from the data that was made available during the course of the search, it was revealed that the second respondent is in the habit of maintaining parallel invoices. Thus, the Department/Revenue suspected clandestine removal of the finished goods without declaration and payment of excise duty. It is in these circumstances and in light of these serious allegations covering a period from Nov., 2001 to March, 2002 and March, 2004, eventually that a statement was recorded and a show cause notice came to be issued. The show cause notice dated 17th Sept., 2004 demanded a sum of Rs. 1,05,35,493/-. Sec. 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was invoked and the Department was also anxious to impose penalty under Sec. 11AG of the Act for evasion of Central Excise duty and interest under Sec. 11AB of the said Act. Exhibit 'A' is a copy of the show cause notice.