Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
S.S. Garg

ORDER

S.S. Garg, Member (J)

1. The appellants have filed these two appeals against the separate impugned orders both dated 21.05.2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal of the company by confirming the Order-in-Original but in the case of Executive Director Murari Lal Agarwal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has reduced the penalty from 4,69,148/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Sixty Nine Thousand One Hundred and Forty Eight only) to Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only). Since the investigation and the evidence collected in the present case relates to both the parties, therefore both the appeals are being taken up together for discussion and disposal. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the Appellant No. (1) is engaged in the manufacture of sponge iron falling under Chapter 72 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and was registered under Central Excise Department and are clearing the goods on payment of excise duty. The officers of the DGCEI, Hyderabad Region conducted investigation at the end of M/s. Shivam Smelters Pvt. Ltd., Gajwel Manda, Medak District and also residence of the Managing Director Shri. Govind Kumar Agarwal on 04.03.2011 and recovered various documents. As part of the investigation, statement of Shri. Govind Kumar Agarwal, the Managing Director was recorded on 04.03.2011 during which he inter alia stated that they have indulged in clandestine clearance of sponge iron and clandestine manufacture and clearance of MS Ingots occasionally due to market conditions. During the course of investigation, statement of Appellant No. (2) was recorded wherein he admitted the clearance of 290 MT of sponge iron to M/s. Shivam Smelters at the rate of Rs. 1400/- per MT. After completion of the investigation, appellants were issued with the show-cause notice No. 14/2013 dated 31.01.2013 by the Deputy Director General of Central Excise Intelligence, Hyderabad proposing to demand Central Excise duty of Rs. 4,69,148/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Sixty Nine Thousand One Hundred and Forty Eight only) along with interest and also proposed to impose penalties under the provisions of Central Excise Act and the Rules made thereunder. Appellant filed detailed reply to the show-cause notice and the Assistant Commissioner after considering the submissions of the appellant vide Order-in-Original dated 30.12.2016/02.01.2017 confirmed the demand as proposed in the show-cause notice apart from imposing penalties on both the appellants. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant filed two appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals) Belgaum and the learned Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order dated 21.05.2018 rejected the appeal of the Appellant No. (1) but in the case of Appellant No. (2), the Commissioner (Appeals) reduced the penalty to Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only) under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules.

2. Heard both the parties and perused the records.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned orders are not sustainable in law as the same have been passed without properly appreciating the facts and the law. He further submitted that the demand has been confirmed solely on the basis of the statement of the Managing Director who was made to admit the duty liability by using force. He further submitted that the Managing Director was not questioned with reference to any of the documentary evidences but a bald statement was recorded solely for the purpose of demanding of duty. Except for his statement there is not even an iota of evidence to prove the allegations of clandestine removal on the part of Appellant No. (1). He further submitted that even in the statement of Shri. Govind Kumar Agarwal, Managing Director of M/s. Shivam Smelters, the Appellant No. (1) has not been named from whom he has procured the sponge iron. He further ........