9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (6) TMI 550X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dent. [Order per : C.N.B. Nair, Member (T)]. There is a duty demand of over Rs. one lakh against the first appellant M/s. Pace Marketing Specialities in addition confiscation of goods and penalty. On the second appellant, there is a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- under Rule 209A. The duty demand is on the ground that goods seized on 2-10-96 by the Central Excise Authorities at Gauhati had been c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods covered by the aforesaid two invoices. He also pointed out that the statement of the driver at the time of seizure of the goods also indicated that the goods under seizure were not cleared from any factory; but was cleared from the godown near Delhi, U.P. border in Sahibabad. According to the ld. Counsel, this statement showed the goods under seizure had not been cleared from the appellant man ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red by the first appellant under its invoices dt. 26-8-96 on payment of duty. The second duty demand made under the impugned orders is, therefore, not maintainable. In the absence of duty demand, penalties and redemption fines are not sustainable. In these circumstances, both the appeals are allowed after setting aside the impugned order in so far as it relates to the appellants. It is further dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
