2013 (8) TMI 385

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e appellant are manufacturers of printed flexible packing material in roll and pouches chargeable to Central Excise duty. Their raw material is plastic granules and metalized film. Their factory was visited by the officers on 12-9-2008 and the stock of finished goods, intermediate products as well as raw material was checked. No discrepancy was found in the stock of finished goods. However, there .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... iscation of plastic granules and metalized film under Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules with option to be redeemed on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 50,000/-. Beside this he also imposed penalty of Rs. 1,30,000/- on the appellant-company and penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on Director of the appellant-company under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules. On appeals being filed to the Commissioner (Appeals), .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o intention to clear the same without payment of duty and, hence, its confiscation under Rule 25 is not sustainable. He also pleaded that in the circumstances of the case, there was no justification for imposition of the penalty on the appellant company or its Director and, as such, impugned order upholding the Cenvat credit demand and penalty is not correct. 4. Ms. Shweta Bector, the learned Dep .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Cenvat Credit Rules, the same could not be confiscated under Rule 15 and, as such, the confiscation of plastic granules and metalized film and redemption fine imposed, in respect of the same is not sustainable. 7. As regards plastic film, the same admittedly, is a product manufactured by the appellant, though it is for captive use. The appellant admittedly were maintaining its account in the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on the appellant-company is reduced to Rs. 20,000/-. 8. The impugned order does not give any finding as to how the provisions of Rule 26 are attracted in the case Shri Umesh Kumar Agarwal, Director as this Rule is applicable in respect of person who knowingly deals with the excisable goods which he knew or had reason to believe are liable for confiscation. In view of this, the penalty on Shri U .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X