9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 169X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as not any merit in the appeal and accordingly reject the same - if the fine is paid, the goods have to be returned - it is nobody's case that if the respondent pays redemption fine the goods will be returned by the Revenue - if the goods have been seized and released provisionally after execution of bond confiscation order can be made and fine can be imposed but not otherwise –the order operating the confiscation and the redemption fine imposed in lieu of confiscation is unsustainable – Decided in favour of Assessee. - E/850/11-SM - - - Dated:- 1-7-2013 - M V Ravindran, J. For the Appellant: Shri D K Trivedi, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri M Kutty, AR PER : M V Ravindran This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ik [2009 (235) E.L.T. 623 (Tri. LB), he produces the copy of the said decision of the tribunal and submits the issue now settled in favour of assessee. 4. Ld. departmental representative reiterates the finding of the lower authorities. 5. I have considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. The only issue that falls for my consideration is whether both the lower authorities were correct in confiscating the goods which were cleared by the appellant by violating the provisions of rule 8 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 6. It is the submission that the goods were not available for confiscation when the impugned order as well as order-in-original was passed, a fact, as the goods have been already cleared and they we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e fine is paid, the goods have to be returned. In this case, it is nobody's case that if the respondent pays Rs. 1 lakh, the goods will be returned by the Revenue. No doubt, if the goods have been seized and released provisionally after execution of bond confiscation order can be made and fine can be imposed but not otherwise. I find that the decision of Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case Shiv Kripa Ispat Put. Lid Vs. C.C.E., Nasik-2009 (235) E.L.T.623 (Tri.-LB) also supports this view. 4. Under these circumstances, I do not find any merit in the appeal and accordingly reject the same." 7. It can be seen from the above reproduced ratio that the issue is no more res-integra. In view of the above, impugned order to the extent it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
