2003 (5) TMI 317

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... been directed by the appellants against the impugned order-in-appeal dated 13-9-2002 vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has affirmed the order-in-original of the adjudicating authority who directed the confiscation of the goods seized from the premises of the appellants with option to get the same redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 1 lakh and also imposed penalty of that much amount on them. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . The adjudicating authority ordered confiscation of the goods seized from the premises of the appellants and also imposed penalty on them as detailed above. The Commissioner (Appeals) through the impugned order, affirmed that order. 3. I have heard both sides. It remains undisputed that the appellants are SSI unit. They are not availing any Modvat credit facility on the inputs which are procure .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ques. No discrepancy in their record whatsoever had been found. 4. Besides this, the perusal of the show cause notice shows that confiscation of the goods found in the premises of the appellants, was never proposed. Only penalty under Rule 209A was proposed in the notice. Therefore, the authorities below had travelled beyond the scope of the show cause notice by ordering confiscation of the seiz .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X