2015 (10) TMI 1309

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ra, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order imposing penalty on them. 2. The facts of the case are that appellant is engaged in manufacturing of Spanners and Wrenches. On 16-1-2009 the premises of the appellants were searched and it was found that there was a shortage of inputs of 114.880 Metric Tonnes. The appellant could not give any explanat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mand on duty of Rs. 16,120/- was sought to be confirmed for clearance of samples without payment of duty. The show cause notice was issued to demand the duty along with interest and imposition of penalty on both the appellants. The show cause notice was adjudicated. A sum of Rs. 10 lakhs paid by the appellant during the course of investigation was appropriated against the impugned demands along wi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r liable for confiscation as the adjudicating authority has not held the case which are liable for confiscation. Therefore, penalty under Rule 26 on the appellants is not imposable. 4. On the other hand the ld. AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 5. Heard the parties. Considered the submissions. 6. On perusal of the impugned order, I find that the appellant has paid .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X