9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (12) TMI 392X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellants herein are engaged in the manufacture of wax coated paper with Central Excise registration. The officers of the Directorate General of Anti-evasion visited the appellants factory on 28-11-1996 and carried out a surprise check of the stock of finished products and raw materials. They found the following excess and shortages : (i) Wax coated paper (final product) - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he stock of finished product and raw materials found in excess as above were also seized by the officers on the basis of similar belief. Statement of the aforenamed Rajesh Rustagi and also that of Shri Vijay Kumar Gupta, Accountant of the appellants firm, were also taken by the officers. On the basis of the materials on record, the Department by show cause notice proposed to confiscate the seized ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eviable thereon; confiscated the currency of Rs. 2.5 lakhs and imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- on the partner, Shri Rajesh Rustagi under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules. The assessee aggrieved by this order of adjudication, preferred appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals), and the latter passed order dated 21-7-1999, which is under challenge in the captioned appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... short had been consumed in the manufacture of wax coated paper which was clandestinely removed without payment of duty and excise duty of Rs. 41,213/- was also voluntarily paid by him on this count. His statement has not been retracted. Therefore, duty liability of the above amount has been rightly confirmed and penalty of Rs. 41,000/- imposed under Section 11AC is also sustainable. As regards go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... distinguishable. If therefore, uphold the confiscation of the seized excess goods. The redemption fine and penalty are not excessive, having regard to the value of the goods i.e. Rs. 3,32,613/- and having regard to the fact that both redemption fine and penalty stood reduced by the lower appellate authority. 5. In the result, the impugned order is upheld and the appeal rejected. - - TaxTMI - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
