9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 772X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ited the factory of the appellants who are manufacturers of fireworks and found excess stock valued at approximately Rs. 22.68 lakhs and seized the same on the ground that it was liable to confiscation. Show-cause notice was issued proposing confiscation and penal action. There was no demand of duty as the appellant, an SSI unit, was within the ceiling limit of value of clearances. The notices was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 172 (Tri.-Del.)], the Tribunal set aside the confiscation of goods and penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 as unwarranted in the absence of any evasion of duty (the production of the assessees up to the date of officers visit was within the exemption limit), and this order has been upheld by the Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court as seen from 2008 (226) E.L.T. 340 (P H) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Tribunal in the case of Shanti Fastners (supra), where a Single Member has taken a view to set aside the confiscation of the goods and imposition of penalty, in the facts of the case while holding as follows :- 5. Clearly, the appellant was required to keep basic accounts of production in terms of the trade notice. It should do so, and for failure to do the same, Revenue authorities can proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere a manufacturer does not account for any excisable goods manufactured, produced, or stored by him. Hence, even in cases where there may not be any duty evasion or intention to evade duty, still confiscation and penalty can be justified for contraventions covered under Rule 173Q(1)(a) (b) which would cover cases of non-accountal of production and removal of goods clandestinely without cover of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
