SAMCOR GLASS LTD. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the impugned Order -in -appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 24.8.2001 vide he had affirmed the Order -in -original of the Additional Commissioner confirming the duty and imposing penalty on the apppellants, as detailed therein.

(2.) The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of monochrome glass panels, funnels and shells falling under chapter heading 7008.20 of the CETA. They are using cerium oxide and pumice powder etc. They are also carrying out job work activity. They imported raw materials at concessional rate of duty under the provisions of Notification No. 64/95 -Cus. date 16.3.95 as amended by Notification No. 13/97 -Cus. dated 1.3.97. But they instead of using that material in the manufacture of the final product, cleared the same as such. Having done so, they were served with show cause notice for payment of differential duty for which they had availed concession under the abovesaid notification. They contested the show cause notice by denying the allegations, but the Additional Commissioner who adjudicated the show cause notice, came to the conclusion that the appellants did not utilise the imported raw materials for the specified purpose and were liable to pay differential duty. He confirmed the differential customs duty of Rs. 2,56,060, differential countervailing duties of Rs. 33,144, differential Special Additional Duty of Rs. 3,080 under proviso to Section 28(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, and also imposed penalty of Rs. 2,92,284 under Section 114A of the Customs Act. He further imposed penalty of Rs. 10,00,000 under Section 117 of the Customs Act. Besides that the Additional Commissioner further confirmed Central Excise duty of Rs. 1,58,821 under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules and imposed penalty of equal amount under Section 11AC of the Act and penalty of Rs. 10,000 under Rules 9(2), 52A, 173Q(1) and 226 of the Central Excise Rules against the appellants. This order of the Additional Commissioner had been confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) through the impugned order.

(3.) We have heard both sides and gone through the record.