HAWKINS COOKERS LTD. Vs. CCE, CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal filed by M/s Hawkins Cookers Ltd, the issue involved is whether penalty is imposable when the excisable goods are cleared under invoices but without debiting the PLA. The Appellants have also challenged the quantum of redemption fine fixed by the Adjudicating authority for redeeming the goods ordered to be confiscated.

(2.) Shri K.K.Anand, Ld. Advocate, submitted that on 19 -6 -98, the Appellants had removed 1237 Pressure Cookers under invoice No. 375 dt. 19 -6 -98 at 11:35 hrs; that the value of these goods was Rs. 6,05,386 and duty involved was Rs. 48,430.90p; that they had clearly mentioned PLA debit entry No. in the invoice; that the goods were removed to Central Warehousing Corporation; that Central Excise Officers visited their premises of at 12.25 hrs and as duty had not been debitted in PLA they seized the goods on the same day. He, further, mentioned that they had debitted the duty immediately against entry No. 155 in PLA; that there was no malafide intention to evade payment of duty which is evident from the fact that PLA debit entry No. was mentioned on the invoice; that due to heavy work pressure the posting in the appropriate register was at a slower pace and being alone that particular day this clarical error of not actually debitting PLA took place; that further, two out of three persons concerned from the despatch Department were absent; that there was sufficient balance in their PLA; that no penalty is imposable under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act as there was no malafide intention on their part; that redemption fine is on very high side.

(3.) Countering the submissions, Shri A.K. Jain, Id. D.R., submitted that there was clear mis -declaration by the Appellants is as much as they had mentioned PLA debit entry NO. and the invoice when no duty was debited in PLA; that the goods were removed without payment of duty which is prohibited under Rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules; that the Appellate Tribunal in the case of Steel Industries Vs. CCE Cochin, 1986 (24) ELT 314 has held that the fact that there was sufficient balance in the PLA by itself does not make clearances without proper details valied in law.