2006 (12) TMI 393

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the Respondent. [Order]. Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby the goods which were cleared without payment of duty were confiscated and allowed to he released on payment of redemption fine, demand of duty on the goods found short in the factory was confirmed and penalties were imposed. The contention of the appellant is that certai .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ellant also pleaded that quantum of penalty is excessive. 3. The contention of the Revenue is that terry towels valued at Rs. 44,544/- were found in excess in the tempo then mentioned in the invoice, therefore, these terry towels are liable for confiscation. The Revenue is also of the view that there is no explanation given by the appellant regarding shortage of terry towels in the factory, ther .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... refore, I find no merit in the contention of the appellant that penalty is in excessive. 4. The duty paid goods which were found in the tempo were confiscated on the ground that these were used concealing the clandestinely cleared goods. In the present case, the goods are terry towels as certain goods found in excess the goods mentioned in the invoice therefore, it cannot be said that duty paid .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X