2011 (6) TMI 435

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ined based on dip reading method is not justified. It is also noticed that authorised signatory has not retracted his statement recorded u/s 14 clearly admitting excess found goods on the date of visit by the officer. Thus, irregular maintenance of stock accounts is clearly established and provisions of Rule 25 (1)(b) of Central Excise Rules are attracted, excess found goods are liable for confisc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... redemption fine of Rs.15,000/- and also imposed penalty of Rs.10,000/- under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the original authority. 3. Learned advocate submits that the weight ascertained by the officers was following the dip reading method and therefore, it is not reliable and that there was, in fact, no excess stock. Further, the finding tha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ly established and provisions of Rule 25 (1)(b) of Central Excise Rules are attracted. Therefore, the excess found goods are liable for confiscation and penalties also imposable. I find that the quantum of redemption fine and penalties imposed are reasonable and are not excessive considering the value of goods found in excess is Rs.4,48,402/-. 6. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X