2004 (6) TMI 524

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order]. In this appeal, the appellants have questioned the correctness of the impugned order-in-appeal vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has affirmed the order of the adjudicating authority ordering the confiscation of the seized goods, imposing redemption fine of Rs. 1 lakh and personal penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on the appellants. 2. The learned Counsel has contended that since no du .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... produced Invoice No. 331, dated 14-1-1998 of M/s. Shiv Trading Company, Panipat. On interrogation, the driver told that the goods were loaded by me from the factory premises of M/s. Chirag Spinning Mills. On follow up action, it revealed that M/s. Chirag Spinning Mills, M/s. Deepak Spinning Mills and M/s. Akshay Spinning Mills (appellants) were housed in one premises. The goods were seized on the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ants. But strangely enough, no such demand was raised in the show cause notice. In the show cause notice, the imposition of penalty and confiscation of the seized goods was proposed. But when these goods were neither found to be unaccounted nor any shortage of the finished goods was found on account of removal of the seized goods in the factory premises, the plea of the appellants that these goods .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X