9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (7) TMI 346X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ise, on 3-4-1997, found finished goods in the appellants' factory in excess over the recorded balance in RG.1 Register. Raw-materials were also found unaccounted, in the absence of any records having been maintained by the appellants in respect of raw-materials. Both the finished goods and raw-materials were seized. The adjudicating authority ordered confiscation of the finished goods and raw-mate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the appellants by the adjudicating authority. The present appeal before the Tribunal is against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. I have heard ld. Advocate Shri K.C. Sharma for the appellants and ld. JDR Dr. Ravinder Babu for the respondents. Ld. Counsel has reiterated the main ground of the appeal, which is to the effect that the raw-materials were actually duty-paid and had cea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n respect of raw-materials and also imposition of penalty on the appellants. Ld. JDR has opposed these arguments by submitting that the party had not contested the allegations in the show-cause notice but pleaded for a lenient view while debiting the duty demanded. In view of acceptance of the Department's case by the appellants; ld. JDR submits, the grounds of appeal against the order of ld. Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not excisable to attract the provisions of Clause (b) ibid. As a result, the decision cited by ld. Advocate namely Devinder Sanitations v. CCE, New Delhi [1996 (88) E.L.T. 589 (T)] becomes distinguishable. I, therefore, uphold the finding of the lower appellate authority that there was no justification for non-accountal of the raw-materials. The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) upholding the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lready set aside by the lower appellate authority, there was no question of any imposition of penalty as consequential to such confiscation. The penalty of Rs. 3,600.00/- being not relatable to the confiscation of raw-materials, cannot be accepted as penalty imposed on the party for non-accountal of raw-materials. I, therefore, set aside the above penalty. The appeal is allowed only to this extent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
