9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (4) TMI 421X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i Bipin Verma, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. The above captioned appeals have been filed against the common order-in-appeal vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the duty with penalty on the firm appellant No. I and penalties on other appellants. 2.The facts are not much in dispute. On 9-7-2002, one truck carrying the goods was intercepted by the Central Excise Office ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der the law. This duty has been confirmed regarding the goods which were initially cleared by the appellants firm on payment of duty but were received back by them being defective and after removing the defects they cleared those very goods to the buyers. The only lapse committed by the firm was of non-following of the procedure in terms of Rule 16 of the Rules, but for that lapse, duty could not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the facts and circumstances of the case, the redemption fine in respect of the goods seized from the truck involving duty of Rs. 9,843/- is reduced from Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 5,000/-. No penalty on the driver of the truck appellant No. 3 could be imposed as he had no role to play in removal of the goods by the firm. Whatever documents were given to him by the firm, he was carrying with him and show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
