CENTRAL EXCISE

Nimbus Pipes Ltd Vs CCE & ST

CX - The assessee is a manufacturer of HDPE Pipes & Tubes - In 2012, assessee shifted their unit situated at Bagru Industrial Area, Jaipur to Manda Industrial Area, District-Jaipur - Consequent upon such transfer, assessee transferred the Cenvat Credits available in books of Bagru Unit to that of the Manda Unit - The Department formed the opinion that such transfer of Cenvat Credits in terms of Rule 10 of CCR, 2004 is not permissible since the assessee has failed to comply with conditions of said Rule - The assessee has claimed transfer of Cenvat Credit from the Bagru Unit to Manda Unit to which Bagru Unit was shifted - It is claimed that the inputs and capital goods as well as work in progress have been transferred from Bagru to Manda Unit - The findings of lower authority is that the inputs/ capital goods on which credit has been availed as well as finished goods on which assessee is liable to pay duty were not available in records of the Bagru Unit at the time of filing application for transfer - But it is admitted by assessee that the physical transfer preceded such application - Department should have taken up the verification of documents submitted by assessee which appear to indicate clearly the stock position of various goods at the Bagru Unit at the time of its transfer - The documents evidencing the physical movement of such goods to the Manda Unit also have been submitted - Department was not justified in denying such transfer of credit under Rule 10 of CCR, 2004 - The impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to Original Authority for reconsideration of the claim for transfer of Cenvat Credit after verification of documents submitted: CESTAT

- Matter remanded: DELHI CESTAT

CUSTOMS

Surya Prakash Kothari Vs CC

Cus - (DRI) intercepted two containers laden in two identical lorries - One container was found to be sealed with one time bottle seal and contained Granite Slabs of various length and breath - While the second container was found to contain reddish brown colour wooden logs which were subsequently confirmed as Red Sanders without any accompanying documents - It appeared to department that Senthil Murugan @ City Raja and Vasudevan @ Ravi had engaged themselves in act of attempting export of Red Sanders in guise of granite slabs; that they had brought substitution cargo, granite slabs from Prism Granites; that they got IEC of Prism Granites from assessee; that they had appointed and led a team of persons for transport of red sanders and also allegedly cheated the officers of Customs in manner of examination by way of presenting granite for examination at CFS in one truck and substitution of red sanders for export in another truck - The main perpetrators of foiled attempted export of red sanders had gone to great lengths to plan and execute the modus operandi - It also appears to reason that the consignment of granite slabs might have been camouflage cargo to be presented for Customs examination to be possibly substituting later within the consignment of red sanders in another identical container on which the same container number and other markings had been got done - Tribunal is unable to fathom how the very convoluted manner of receiving sale proceeds, by cash in advance, subsequently receiving sale amount from abroad, that too from an unknown person, through banking channels and then returning the cash advance received back to Vasudevan did not raise any doubt or discomfort in mind of assessee, as would have been happened to any other prudent person - This being so, while there is nothing on record to allege that assessee had conspired or connived with the main protagonist in attempted export of red sanders, he will definitely have to take the blame for having facilitated the entire modus operandi by allowing use of his IEC and also allowing bank account to be used by Shri S. Vasudevan - Although there is nothing much in the record which can point to any active abetment on the part of assessee, the acts and omissions on his part definitely point to a level of "passive abetment" - Penalty under Section 114 (i) of the Act is very much imposable on assessee, however, considering that no active abetment, connivance or conspiracy with the main perpetrator has been alleged or brought out in SCN, penalty is reduced to Rs.3,00,000/-: CESTAT

- Appeal partly allowed: CHENNAI CESTAT