9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (6) TMI 366X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss than the record balance. It was also noticed that the said goods were fully packed and in ready to despatch condition. Production slips in the said goods were destroyed by the appellant. Inasmuch as the goods were not entered in RG-1 register, the same were seized. 2. As a follow up action, their transporters premises was also searched. 9,120 Kg of rolls meant for gutka manufactures was found lying there. The statement of Shri Manjay Shukla, transporter s authorised representative was recorded deposing that the goods in question have been received from the appellant without the cover of any duty paying documents. Further, Shri Nitin Mali, proprietor of the transporters company also admitted that the goods belonging to the appellant and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e factory premises. Specific attention has been drawn to the Tribunal s decision in the case of Bhillai Conductors reported in 2000 (125) E.L.T. 781. However, I find that in this case, at the time of their seizure, the goods were found to be in packed condition and in ready to despatch condition . The above was also admitted by the appellant s authorised representative in their statements. As such, I find no justification to accept the belated explanation by the manufacturer that the goods were intermediate goods and not finished goods. The ratio of the Larger Bench in the case of Billai Conductors is to the effect that final product not entered in RG-1 should not be ordinarily; confiscated unless there is some evidence to show that they ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant. The statement of transporter s proprietor and authorised representative, cannot be made sole basis for holding the goods as having been manufactured and cleared by the appellant, in the absence of corroboration by any independent evidence. The statements of the appellant s representative are to the effect that their finished product are different from laminated rolls for gutkas, which is seized material from the transporter s premises. As such, I do not find any justifiable reason to confirm the demand of duty against the appellant. 7. It is also seen that no personal penalty has been imposed upon the manufacturing unit. Personal penalty of Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 5,000/- imposed upon Shri Dang and Shri Nitin Mali under the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
