RAJINDER ALLOYS LTD. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the order dated 3.11.1993 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur. By the impugned order, the Collector has confiscated 78.324 MTs of CRF Sections (U and S) under Rule 173Q and allowed redemption of the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 1 lakh in lieu of confiscation; confirmed demand of duty of Rs. 1,33,113.30 P(sic)cn 113.14 MT of CRF Sections (D.C.T.H.Z and A Variety) under Rule 9(2) of Central Excise Rules read with Section 1 A(1) proviso of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000 on the appellant under Rule 173 -Q which is under challenge in this appeal.

(2.) The appellants have also filed a Misc application dated 14.9.2001 requesting permission to raise additional grounds of appeal as under:

(3.) Shri R. Santhanam, learned Advocate, has appeared on behalf of the appellants and he has submitted that the stocks of shapes and sections were jumbled up and it was impossible to segregate them or account them section -wise; that stocks available in the factory was not weighed because weighments are done in dharamkanta which is about 2 kms from the factory. To weigh the stocks available in the factory, roughtly 40 trucks were required and even then, it would have taken 15 days to complete the weighment; Annexure 'A' to the show cause notice does not indicate the process that was adopted to ascertain the figures of balance of various shapes and sections; no chart indicating section -wise counting of various shapes and section was prepared by the Preventive officer, Kanpur, that to ascertain the weight of various sections, method of conversion factor (RUD No. 2) has been used. This table of conversion factor is essentially incorrect; that the quantity ascertained is arbitrary and un -realiable; that the excess allegedly ascertained is 178.374 MT and shortage of 113.142 MT. The excess ascertained in section as per Annexure is 66,849.07; that the officers visited the factory on 24.2.93 and the balance of RGI was taken as per closing balance of 24.2.93. Production of 24.2.93 was taken to 39.890 MT. The officers completed the checks on 27.2.93. Production of 26.3.93 i.e. 33 MTs should have been accounted for ascertaining the alleged excess. The chart Annexure A was prepared in the late hours of 26.2.93 but the production of 26.2.93 was not taken into account while ascertaining the alleged excess of 173.74 MTs; that stock taking, calculation has not been done by Assistant Commissioner, that clandestine removal has not been proved by direct evidence; similarly actual shortages have not been worked out; that the show cause notice has not been signed by the Collector; that finally he submits that the notice not signed is invalid and he relied on the following decisions in support of his contention: 136 ITR 330; 127 ELT 795 68 ELT 807; 132 ELT 659 54 ELT 228 ; 59 ELT 537 The above decisions have been quoted to the effect that the notice not signed is invalid, excess and shortages should be adjusted; actual payment is necessary.