SEKAR MATCH INDUSTRIES Vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three appeals arise out of the common impugned order passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Madurai.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on a check of the appellants' factory premises the Central Excise authorities found that the work relating to frame filling of splints and box filling of matches was being carried on in these three units and there was no stock of essential raw materials like Chlorate, Sulphur, red-phosphorus, etc. nor the Central Excise statutory accounts were available in the premises. The authorities also found that there was no stock of any residuary chemical composition of match heads. The explanation given by the appellants was that the raw materials and accounts books were kept in the godown of M/s. Manohara Match Works, referred to as the main factory, and in their office (Manohara Match Works). The lower authorities charged the appellants that all the factories were working as one unit and that they were liable to pay higher rate of duty i.e., instead of Rs. 1.60 per gross Rs.3.50/4.50 per gross. The learned lower authority has held that since only the job of frame filling alone was being done in the 3 units and the other job of dipping of match head composition and dipping in the wax was not being done the manufacture of matches in fact was not being carried out in the 3 units. Since the appellants were all found to be related to the proprietor of M/s. Manohara Match Works, the lower authority concluded that all these three factories jointly produced matches outside their licensed premises and were doing only the work of box filling and were clearing all the matches at concessional rate. The lower authority, therefore, demanded the differential duty of Rs. 1,36,762.50; Rs. 1,61,787.50 and Rs. 1,43,262.50 from M/s. Sekar Match Industries, M/s. Thenmoli Match Industries and M/s. Shenbagalli Match Works respectively. A penalty of Rs. 2,000 was also imposed on each of the three appellants.

(3.) THE learned JDR for the Department stated that while there is circumstance of suspicion against the appellants, there was no information with him or in the records as to where the matches had actually been manufactured and he has no specific plea to make in regard to this missing link.