9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 608X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cess were cut tobacco (as per panchnama) then there is no need to account them in the RG I register. In view of this, confiscation and demand of duty on 609 Kgs. of cut tobacco does not seems to be in accordance with the law. The demand is unsustainable, hence demand and confiscation on such cut tobacco are set aside. There is no allegation that packing materials were removed from the factory premises on which Cenvat credit was availed. Further, there is no provisions in the Rules which indicate to re-calculate the amount of Cenvat credit attributable to the excess goods found in the factory premises and raise a demand. In our considered view, the Cenvat credit reversal on the packing material could have been correct if they have been fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on fine and Modvat credit was sought to be reversed and duty demanded on cut tobacco,and penalty was also imposed. Aggrieved by such order in original, the appellant preferred the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) also did not accept their contention and rejected the appeal. 3. Learned Advocate Shri T.R. Rustogi, appearing for the appellant would draw our attention to the findings recorded by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). He would also draw attention to the panchnama drawn and statement recorded and the show cause notice. He would submit that the cut tobacco which was found in excess was confiscated on the ground that they have not been recorded in the RG I register. It is his submission that the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ollowing findings: 5. I have gone through the facts of the case and various submissions made by the appellant. I find that the cut tobacco weighting 609 Kgs. was found in excess of the RG I register meant only for finished and excisable goods and not for non-excisable goods and the plea of the appellant at this stage that the same were not excisable goods does not hold good and is not sustainable. Regarding the plea of the appellant that the inputs found in excess were from the stock of non-modvatable inputs which existed prior to 1.03.2000 is also not tenable in view of the fact that Modvatable and non-modvatable inputs cannot be identified after a lapse of more than one year. It cannot also be presumed that the inputs which were declar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... annot be any second opinion on the contentions raised by the learned Counsel, that in RG I register, record is to be maintained of manufactured finished goods / excisable goods. If it is admitted fact that the goods which were found in excess were cut tobacco (as per panchnama) then there is no need to account them in the RG I register. In view of this, confiscation and demand of duty on 609 Kgs. of cut tobacco does not seems to be in accordance with the law. The demand is unsustainable, hence demand and confiscation on such cut tobacco are set aside. 9. As regards the demand of duty and confiscation for the packing material found in excess, we find that there is no dispute that these goods were found in excess than the recorded balance i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
