2005 (9) TMI 546

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dhwa, Member (J)]. The challenge in the present appeal is to the penalty of Rs. 50,000/- imposed under the provisions of Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2. The manufacturer M/s. Vardhaman Polymer Industries are engaged in the manufacture of plastic, moulded parts of domestic mixer falling under chapter sub-heading 8509.00 of the CETA. In October, 1992 searches were conducted and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... impugned order passed by the Commissioner, penalties of various amounts have been imposed on various purchasers. Hence this appeal. 3. Shri R. Nambirajan, ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant states that the finding given by the adjudicating authority lacks precision. He would argue that neither the show cuse notice nor the findings show that ingredients of Rule 209A of the Central Excise R .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed the submission made by both sides. When we go through the provisions it is clear that to attract Rule 209A it should be established that any person who acquires possession or is in any way concerned in transporting, removing, depositing or keeping or purchasing any excisable goods which he knows or has reason to believe are liable to confiscation under the Act or the Rules, he may be liable to, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X