9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (3) TMI 649X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. Penalty each of Rs. 15,000/- has been imposed on other two appellants. The officers effected seizure of raw materials and finished goods lying unaccounted for in the relevant register. The adjudicating authority confiscated the goods and gave an option to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- Commissioner (Appeals) only set aside the confiscation of land and building and confirmed the rest of the order. 2. Heard both sides. 3. Basically two major facts are involved. One relates to recovery of a duplicate invoice No. 30, dated 29-5-98 indicating removal of 30 diesel oil engines. The visiting officers noticed that, the invoice of the same serial No. was also in existence against which removal of one engine is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , without indicating the packing details. As the details in the lorry receipt have to be of different nature compared to details required in the invoices, unless there is a discrepancy in the common aspects recorded in both the documents, it cannot be said that the two documents differ and are not correlated to each other. The common details are the truck No. and the description, besides the Date and Destination which tally in both the documents. Besides, invoice clearly refers to transportation by Globe Cargo Service. I therefore hold that, the lower authorities were correct in holding that, the said 30 engines were manufactured and clandestinely removed from the factory of the appellants without payment of duty. Consequently demand for Rs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4, dated 25-3-84 issued by Meerut Commissionerate, in respect of Internal Combustion Engines only the (a) Block castings or (b) Crank cases or (c) Nozzle holders and fuel pumps are specified as the principal raw materials. No discrepancy has been pointed out in respect of the principal raw material in respect of which the appellants are maintaining the account. The alleged excess material has been seized and subsequently subjected to confiscation on the ground that there was a possibility of utilisation of the unaccounted raw material for clandestine production and clearance. This finding cannot be supported. There is no provision in the rules for confiscating the unaccounted raw material, in cases where no Modvat credit has been taken. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
