2005 (4) TMI 396 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against Order-in-Appeal setting aside confiscation of goods and penalty imposed on a company.

Analysis:
- The Appeal was filed against the Order-in-Appeal that had set aside the confiscation of goods and penalty imposed on a company. The officers found unaccounted goods during a visit to the factory premises, leading to the confiscation and penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals) reversed the decision based on a Tribunal's decision in a similar case. However, the Tribunal held that unaccounted goods are liable for confiscation under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2001, and penalty can be imposed as per the rules. The Tribunal emphasized that the intention of the manufacturer is not relevant; once goods are unaccounted for, confiscation and penalty are necessary.

- The Tribunal referred to a Supreme Court judgment emphasizing that both confiscation and imposition of penalty are required when goods are not accounted for, regardless of the manufacturer's intention. The law mandates manufacturers to record excisable goods, and failure to do so makes the goods offending, leading to confiscation and penalty. In this case, considering all circumstances, the Tribunal determined a redemption fine of Rs. 15,000 and imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,000 on the company. The Appeal was allowed in favor of the Revenue, upholding the confiscation and penalty on the unaccounted goods found at the factory premises.

This detailed analysis highlights the key points of the judgment, emphasizing the legal basis for the decision and the reasoning behind upholding the confiscation and penalty on the unaccounted goods.