9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 441X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould be Rs.1 lakh as against Rs.3 lakhs imposed by the lower authorities. The impugned order to that extent is modified and the redemption fine is reduced from Rs.3 lakhs to Rs.1 lakh. Regarding penalty - Held that:- the ends of justice would meet when the penalty is reduced from Rs.3 lakhs. Personal penalty on partners and employees - Held that:- the judgment of the Honble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Mohammed Farookh Mohammed Ghani [2010 (7) TMI 378 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT], Mahendra Kumar Kapadia [2010 (9) TMI 308 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] and Jai Prakash Motwani [2009 (1) TMI 501 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] will apply - no hesitation in holding the impugned order to the extent it upholds the penalty on the individuals is unsustainab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... than the recorded balance. Shri Pandey replied that the reason can best be explained by Shri Manish Ramavtar Agarwal, who is partner of the firm. Accordingly the officers informed the panchas that reply of Shri Pandey was not satisfactory and the officers have reason to believe that these excess goods were offending in nature and were liable for confiscation. Thereafter the officers seized the aforesaid goods and handed over to Shri Pandey under suparatnama for safe custody. A statement of Shri Manish Ramavtar Agarwal, partner of M/s. Shri Khatu Shyam Industries was recorded on 18.11.09, wherein he inter-alia stated that they have purchased the inputs i.e. M.S. Ingots from open market and the same have not been entered in statutory records ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellants would submit that the lower authorities have confiscated and imposed redemption fine on the raw materials as well as the finished goods. It is his submission that there are judicial pronouncements which clearly lay down that as regards the raw materials, confiscation cannot be ordered at the end of the recipient. He would rely upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of J.J. Packagers (P) Ltd. 2006 (196) E.L.T. 381 (Tri. - Del.) and Rana Concast Ltd. 2004 (177) E.L.T. 483 (Tri. - Del.). He would submit that the adjudicating authority as well as the first appellate authority has not considered the submissions of the appellants in as much as specific sub clause as indicated in Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s on the raw materials and finished goods which were found excess is sustainable and whether the penalty imposed by the lower authorities on the partnership firm, partner and the authorised signatory are also sustainable. 9. At the outset, I find that there is no dispute as to finding of the fat of excess raw material and finished goods being found when the officers visited the premises of the appellant-assessee. 10. As regards the confiscation of the raw materials M.S. Ingots which were found during the visit of the officers, there is a statement which indicates that the said ingots were purchased from open market. Findings that such ingots were not duty paid when they were procured from the market is not substantiated. If that be so, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
