9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (7) TMI 403X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Act. It also proposed confiscation of furniture found in excess of stocks in the factory and show rooms and proposed the confiscation of plant and machinery under Rule 173Q(2), interest on the duty to be determined under Section 11AB and penalty under Section 11AC and under Rule 9(2), 52(A), 173Q, 209A, 209, 210 and 226 were proposed. The learned Commissioner after considering records of the case, passed the impugned Order confirming as follows : - "(i) Demand for duty is confirmed for Rs. 2,21,017 (Rupees two lakh twenty one thousand and seventeen only). (ii) Redemption fine of Rs. 50,000/- i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the eligibility has been accorded by the Revenue. Price is required to be treated as inclusive of duty and the duty demands, if any, are also therefore to be worked out. This Order which has not considered, the working out of the 'value' for the exemption limit and the duties, if any, as per the provisions of law, is required to be set aside and remanded back for re-determination by the original authority. (b) We find that the appellant has also taken the plea of the goods being handicrafts and therefore being eligible for the benefits of Notification No. 76/86. The Commissioner in his Order has found, as regards, the submission of handicrafts as follows : - "It cannot be disputed that some of the furniture manufac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted to produce certain photographs, which were now available with the appellants to substantiate the nature of such ornamentation. When we find that there were no photographs or any other material, on record, before the lower authorities, then how they had concluded as regards the extent of ornamentation and it was not substantial, is not understood. Therefore, we are not in a position to uphold the findings on this aspect as arrived at in Para 5.4 to deny the exemption under Notification 76/86. We would therefore in the interest of justice remand the matter back for re-determination in light of such evidence as may be available to determine as to the extent of ornamentation on the wooden furniture under dispute to determine what items and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
