9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1151X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... turer to pay duty of excise on finished goods removed from the factory and to reverse CENVAT credit on inputs removed as such from the factory is mandatory - the permission was sought but not acceded to - the appellant chose to remove the goods outside the factory premises, without even choosing to raise a grievance before the Chief Commissioner against the Commissioners decision on their request ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f CENVAT credit of Rs.36,014/- besides equal amounts of penalties. The other appellant is the Managing Director of the company and is aggrieved by a penalty of Rs.50,000/- imposed on him. After perusing the records and hearing both sides, we find that the impugned demand of duty is on certain quantity of finished goods (valued at Rs.5,80,627/-) which was removed from the factory, without payment o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... datory. If the manufacturer wanted to remove any goods for the purpose of storage outside the factory premises, the law enabled him to do so but with prior permission from the jurisdictional Commissioner. In the instant case, apparently, this permission was sought but not acceded to. Even then, the appellant chose to remove the goods outside the factory premises, without even choosing to raise a g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with this submission inasmuch as the departmental custody of the goods stands already recognized as a security for demand of duty and the denial of CENVAT credit. Such custody cannot prima facie be cited as a defence vis-`-vis the penalties. At this stage, the learned counsel steps in with a fair offer of pre-deposit of Rs.50,000/-, which I am inclined to accept from the side of the assessee. Acco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
