2004 (7) TMI 592

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hese appeals which have been filed by the appellants against the common impugned order-in-appeal imposing penalty of Rs. 15,000/- on the firm, appellants no. 1 and of Rs. 10,000/- on its partner, appellant no. 2, and ordering confiscation of the seized goods redeemable on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 75,000/- on the ground that they had failed to maintain records. 2.I have heard both sides .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... if from that record it revealed that the appellants have crossed the specified limit, so as to enable the officers to order the confiscation of the goods and impose penalty on the appellants for non-maintaining the record. 3.In view of the discussion made above, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside in toto and the appeals of the appellants are accepted with, consequenti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X