9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (5) TMI 440X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red size. The yarns used to be supplied under cover of Annexure II challans to the job worker and the fabrics returned to the appellants under cover of delivery challans . On 25-2-1999, officers of Central Excise intercepted a lorry, which was on way to the appellants factory from the job worker s premises. 2192 kgs of terry fabrics were seized from the vehicle by the officers. Annexure II challan dated 25-1-99 and two delivery challans dated 25-2-99 were also recovered from the driver of the vehicle. A quantity of 1489.92 Kgs. of terry fabrics and a quantity of 46.08 kgs of waste were found to have been mentioned in the Annexure II challan. The quantity to terry fabrics mentioned in the delivery challan was 2208.6 kgs. The actual weigh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a fine on the owner of the vehicle in lieu of confiscation of the vehicle. The appeal filed by the EOU against the decision of the adjudicating authority did not succeed. The present appeal is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) sustaining the decision of the original authority. 2. After hearing both sides and considering their submissions, we find that the duty liability of the appellants in respect of the shortage of goods found in their factory by Departmental officers has, by and large, been conceded. However, the decision of the lower authorities in relation to the goods seized from the vehicle (and subsequently released provisionally to the appellants) is under serious challenge. It is the case of the appellants that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g not befits the case. We also find that this aspect of the case has not been examined by any of the lower authorities. Therefore, we are not in a position to uphold the finding of the authorities that the fabrics seized from the vehicle are liable for confiscation. Consequently the redemption fine imposed by them has to be set aside and it is ordered accordingly. Contextually, it is seen that Rule 210 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was invoked for imposing the fine. The said provision of law was not for fine but for penalty. 4. The lower authorities have imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- on the appellants under Rule 9(2) and Rule 226 of the Central Excise Rules. It is on record that the duty on the finished goods found short in the fac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
