9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 536X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R.K. Tiwari, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri P.M. Rao, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. The above captioned appeals have been directed against the common impugned order-in-appeal vide which the goods of the appellants No. 1 had been ordered to be confiscated which involved excise duty of Rs. 61,034/- with permission to get the same redeemed on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 95, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ordering the confiscation of the goods and imposition of penalty on them, in my view, cannot be accepted. From the record, it is evident that the goods were cleared without payment of duty by the manufacturer and the invoice issued was not genuine. The price of those goods including the duty was paid by the appellants later on. The debit entry was also accordingly made by the manufacturer in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w, as put forth by the learned counsel, is not attracted to the case of the appellants. The Asstt. Commissioner who issued the show cause notice, prima facie, under the Central Excise Act being an Excise officer was competent to issue the same. Moreover, no prejudice can be said to have been caused to the appellants on that score when they were heard by the adjudicating authority as well as by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... praying for the reduction in the redemption fine, deserves to be given due weight keeping in view the fact that the duty involved on the goods, detailed above, and the fact that the duty had been later on paid. Therefore, the redemption fine is reduced to Rs. 25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand only). However, the penalty imposed on both the appellants is maintained being quite reasonable. Excep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
