LAWS(CE)-2014-3-30

SACHIN L. PALOD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

Decided On March 04, 2014
Sachin L. Palod Appellant
V/S
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE are 10 appeals arising from Order -in -Original No. 23/CEX/13, dated 16 -8 -2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Nashik. Vide the impugned order, the adjudicating authority has confirmed the Central Excise duty demand of Rs. 4,61,64,018/ - along with interest thereon and also imposing equivalent amount of penalties on the main appellant M/s. Fasttrack Packers Pvt. Ltd. He has imposed a penalty of Rs. 15 lakhs each on the 3 Directors of the main appellant namely Shri R.R. Gholap, Shri Sachin L. Palod and Shri Milind L. Palod under the provisions of Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. He has also imposed a penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs each on the 3 C & F Agent namely M/s. Vandana Enterprises, M/s. Adipranav Agency and M/s. Rajlaxmi Agency under the provisions of the said Rule 26. He has imposed a penalty of Rs. 1 crore each on M/s. Sargam Retails Pvt. Ltd. and its Director Shri Rajesh O. Malpani under the said Rule 26. He has further imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/ - on Shri Rajendra S. Raka, proprietor of M/s. Rajesh Trading Company, who was the dealer for the main appellant. Aggrieved of the same, the appellants are before us. The stay applications were listed for hearing earlier on 17 -2 -2014 and request for adjournment was made on that date by the appellant. Accordingly, the cases were adjourned to 15 -4 -2014 with liberty to the Revenue to recover dues adjudged against the appellant in accordance with law. Thereafter, the Counsel for the appellant pleaded that due to unavoidable personal reasons, the appellant could not be present and accordingly, modification application was filed requesting for early hearing of the stay petitions and accordingly the stay petitions have been posted for hearing today. The modification application for early hearing are allowed and the stay petitions are taken up for consideration.

(2.) THE learned Counsel for the appellant made the following submissions: -

(3.) WE have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides.