9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (6) TMI 182X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amounting to Rs. 165.27 on the goods found short at the time of verification of the stock on 1-2-1984. In the impugned order, the Additional Collector has held, inter alia, as follows :- From the submissions made by the penalty that they could not make entries of the finished goods in the R.G.1 Register up to date due to negligence and heavy work load, the quantity lying in the finishing room packed in gunny bags and polythene bags had not yet reached the stage warranting its accountal in the R.G.1 Register as the biscuits are not marketed in that condition, the omissions were merely in the nature of a clerical lapse and the seized goods do not merit confiscation on account of this simple and innocent lapse are not accepted. I observe t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent. Shri Bhangoo has argued that on 1-2-1984 Central Excise Officers, during visit of the factory, found 13,783.740 Kgs. biscuits valued at Rs. 1,41,367.82 in excess over and above the recorded balance shown in R.G.1 Register. They also found short, biscuits valued at Rs. 1,573.95 involving duty of Rs. 165.27. Part of the excess quantity mentioned above was found loaded on a truck standing in the factory premises. He has stated that entries in R.G.1 Register in respect of the goods found excess could not be made due to rush of work. Those were production for the period from 28-1-1984 to 1-2-1984. Some of the goods, vide Annexure A-7 enclosed to the appeal memorandum, valued at Rs. 46,809.12 was packed on 1-2-1984 and were to be accounted f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibility. She has stated that imposition of redemption fine and penalty in this case is fully justified. 4. I have considered the records of the case and the arguments of both sides. The case of the Department is that the appellants did not account for in the R.G.1 Register a total quantity of 13,783.740 Kgs. Biscuits valued at Rs. 1,41,367.82, a portion of which was loaded in the Truck for removal from the factory. The second charge is that the goods valued at Rs. 1573.95 involving Central Excise duty of Rs. 165.27 were found short. Annexure A-7 to the appeal memorandum shows that the goods valued at Rs. 46,809.12 was produced on 1-2-1984. Those were to be accounted for in R.G.1 Register in course of the day. The appellants have not, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble goods which are not accounted for or which are removed in contravention of any provision of the Central Excise Rules are liable to confiscation and manufacturer thereof is liable to penalty not exceeding three times the value of the excisable goods which are not accounted for in the statutory records or which are removed in contravention of the provisions of the Rules. In the present case, by not accounting the biscuits produced prior to 1-2-1984 in R.G.1. Register, the appellants have made them liable to penal action and those goods were also liable to confiscation under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. Action of the Additional Collector in confiscating the goods produced prior to 1-2-1984 and not accounting for in R.G.1 Registe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
