9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (10) TMI 508X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ain written arguments and has prayed for a decision in the matter on merits. 2. I have heard learned JDR Mrs. Aruna Gupta and have perused the records. 3. In the written submissions, the appellant has stated that the Commissioner has himself in the impugned order observed that the power of confiscation did not extend to goods which were found in excess and which were still lying in their facto ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... day and not during the day, non-maintenance of records was not established in terms of Rules 53 and 226 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Penalty was also set aside by the said order. 4. The appellant has further submitted that since contravention of Rules 53 and 226 against the manufacturers viz., M/s. Prince Printers has not been established, and the charge against the manufacturer himself ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules. It is seen from the order sheet, dated 13-8-1999 that the appeal filed by M/s. Prince Printers had been rejected earlier and the ROA filed by them had also been rejected, thereafter. 8. On a consideration of the written submissions made by the present appellant, I find that in terms of Notification No. 79/82, dated 28-3-1982, entries in the RG 1 in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
