JAIPUR STEEL STRIPS LTD. Vs. CCE, JAIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the impugned order in appeal dated 28.3.2000 issued on 10.4.2000 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he had upheld the order in original dated 16.10.98 of the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise confirming demand of Rs.2,71,003/ - under Section 11 -A of the Central Excises Act, 1944 and imposing penalty of the equal amount under Section 11 -AC of the Act and another penalty of Rs.1,00,000/ - under Rule 173 -Q of the Central Excise Rules on them.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this appeal may briefly be stated as under:

(3.) The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of cold rolled strips falling under sub -heading 7211.51 of the CETA. The Preventive officers paid a surprise visit to their factory on 23.4.94 and found that there was shortage of 7.8019 MT of CR strips (finished product) and 40.420 MT of HR coils raw material). It also revealed that they were maintaining private weighment register giving details of the description of the CR strips. Shri Madhusudan Chand, Works Manager of the appellants who was present at that time in the factory premises admitted the shortage of the finished product and the raw material. He also admitted the correctness of private production/weighment register regarding the production for period 26th July 1993 to 19.1.94. Similarly, his statement was also endorsed by Shri A.K.Jain, Managing Direction of the appellants whose statement was recorded on 27.4.94 and he also confirmed the shortage and authenticity of the private production/weighment register. The appellants were accordingly thereafter served with a show cause notice vide which duty demand of Rs.2,71,003/ - was raised for the clandestine removal of the goods and penalty under Section 11 -AC of the Act as well as under Rule 173 -Q of the Rules was also proposed to be imposed. 3. The appellants contested the correctness of that show cause notice. They denied the shortage of the finished products as well as raw material and maintained that the goods werenever physically weighed in the factory premies. The Deputy Commissioner, however, did not agree with the version of the appellants and he confirmed the duty demand of Rs.2,71,003/ - on them and also imposed penalty of the equal amount under Section 11 -AC of the Act, besides imposing penalty of Rs.1,00,000/ - under Rule 173 -Q of the Rules. This order of the Deputy Commissioner was, however, challenged by the appellants before the Commissioner (Appeals), but they remained unsuccessful as their appeal was rejected and the order of the Deputy Commissioner was affirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals).