9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 561X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n, Member (T)].- This is an appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 2/2002 dt. 31-1-2002 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Hyderabad. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows. The appellants are the manufacturers of steel tubes, an excisable commodity. The anti evasion officers visited the appellants unit and found some excess stock. The excess stock was seized but late ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al release of goods. Further, the Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the goods provisionally released would not be subjected to confiscation and redemption fine and set aside the confiscation and redemption fine. In view of the Commissioner s observation, the Additional Commissioner took action to encash the bank guarantee of Rs. 76,000/- furnished at the time of provisional release. The appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the time of provisional release of goods cannot be taken as a direction as in the operative portion of the order, the confiscation of the goods ordered in the Order-in-Original dated 31-10-1997 and the redemption fine had been set aside without any condition or riders. In other words, the Commissioner held that the original authority should have ordered enforcement of bond instead of ordering c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the order imposing penalty are set aside, we do not find any reason for enforcement of the bond executed at that time of release of the goods provisionally. Though the original authority acted on the observations of Commissioner (Appeals), such an action is not called for, looking into the totality of circumstances. The learned SDR fairly conceded this point. In these circumstances, we allow t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
