9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (10) TMI 577X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... liable to excise duty whereas the chimneys and laboratory-ware were exempted from payment of duty. On 26-11-1992, officers of the Excise Department visited the factory of the appellants and seized the private record from the possession of one Shri Sunil Agarwal, partner of the appellant-firm. The scrutiny of the private record shows that the appellants had cleared various items of glass and glassware, which were liable to central excise duty to different customers. But, in the statutory record, neither there was any entry for such removals or these goods were removed under guise of exempted goods. After issuance of show cause notice, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and imposed a penalty. Appellants filed the appeal before th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... artner of the firm along with private records which were seized by the Revenue officer. In these circumstances, the appellants cannot say that the private record does not pertain to them or somebody had placed this record in their factory. The contention of the Revenue is also that Shri V.K. Pachori, excise clerk made a detailed statement explaining the entries made in the private record and tried to co-relate with statutory record. He specifically mentioned that in private record where boxes were mentioned are relate to the clearance of glass tumblers. He also explained the entries in their private record in respect of clearance of lamp shades, which were excisable. 5. Ld. D.R. also submitted that the appellants tried to co-relate the en ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... their possession does not belong to them. The entries made in the private record, as interpreted by the excise clerk of the appellant shows the clearance of goods without payment of duty. 8. Further, we find that the appellants tried to plead that chimneys and lamp shades are one and the same thing. We find that Notification 335/86-C.E. exempts glass globe and glass chimney for lamps and lanterns whereas the appellants are manufacturing lamp shades which are different from the glass chimneys and glass globes. Further, the appellants had not produced any evidence to show that the lamp shades are for lamps and lanterns. On the contrary, the customers of the appellants, during investigation, submitted that they were receiving decorative lam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
