LAWS(CE)-1999-8-155

VARDHAMAN POLYMER INDUS. Vs. CCE

Decided On August 18, 1999
Vardhaman Polymer Indus. And Ors. Appellant
V/S
CCE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M /s. Vardhman Polymer Industries were a small scale manufacturer making plastic moulded parts for domestic mixer. They were not licensed under the Central Excise law nor had they filed any declaration claiming the benefit of any Notification. On receipt of intelligence, their premises were searched. It was found that in a majority of cases, the goods were delivered under "kachha delivery challan". Goods totally valued at Rs. 7,61,406 were seized. Accounts of the manufacturers were also seized. Statements of concerned partners and buyers were recorded. At the conclusion of the investigations, show cause notice dated 19.4.1993 was issued. It was alleged that duty amounting to Rs. 30,30,170/ - was short levied on account of goods clandestinely cleared by M/s. Vardhman Polymer Industries. It was alleged that the seized goods were liable to confiscation. M/s. Vardhaman Polymer Industries and its partners S/Shri A.D. Jain and P.D. Jain were allegedly liable to penalty under Rule 173Q and 209A respectively. The buyers of the parts so made and clandestinely cleared without payment of duty were also alleged to be liable to penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.

(2.) AFTER hearing the concerned persons, the Commissioner passed the impugned order confirming duty allegedly short levied and imposing penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs on M/s. Vardhaman Polymer Industries and of Rs. 5 lakhs each on two partners S/Shri P.D. Jain and A.D. Jain. The seized goods were confiscated but were allowed to be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 2 lakhs. On all the buyers respondents to the show cause notice penalties were levied. On S/Shri Vinod Agarwal and J.N. Agarwal, penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs each was levied. On all other buyers penalty imposed was Rs. 50,000/ - each. M/s. Vardhaman Polymer Industries, its partners S/Shri P.D. Jain and A.D. Jain have filed appeals against this order. The following buyers have also filed the appeals:

(3.) ALL the appellants have also filed applications for waiver of pre -deposit and stay of recovery of sums confirmed and imposed in the impugned order.