9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (3) TMI 514X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondent. [Order]. As per facts on record, the appellant-company s factory was visited by the Superintendent (Prev.), Central Excise Division on 27-7-2001, and on physical verification of stock of finished goods, certain items were found in excess of the stock maintained by the appellant-company in their RG-I register. Shri Sunil Mehrotra, Director of the appellant-company in his on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s issued to the appellants proposing confiscation of the seized goods duly valued at Rs. 1,22,111.00 (Rupees one lakh twenty-two thousand one hundred and eleven), and for imposition of personal penalties upon the Managing Director and Director of the Company. The said show cause notice culminated into an Order passed by the adjudicating authority confiscating the seized goods with an option to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onforming to their specifications are supplied to them, the same are rejected by them; that the said goods in question were defective and had not reached a stage where it could be marketable and as such it was not entered in RG-I Register. That this practice is being followed by them for several years and that the Central Excise Officers visiting their factory were fully aware of this practice and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... them in terms of the Purchase Orders given by the Railways and State Electricity Boards. In the very first statement, the Director had disclosed that the same were entered in the RG-I Register because they were to be tested for Galvanising defects. This practice, contended by the appellants, was being followed by them for every year and was in the knowledge of the Central Excise Officers who never ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
