2007 (3) TMI 91

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ng with imposition of personal penalty of identical amount under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. In addition excess found raw material and semi-finished goods than the recorded balance in the statutory records stand confiscated with option to the appellant to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine. 2. After hearing both sides, I find that the appellants were engaged in the manuf .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ce and as such in terms of Mumbai High Court derision in the case of CCE-I v. Gaurav Mercantiles Ltd. reported in 2005 (190) E.L.T. 11 (Bom.) under whose jurisdiction the appellant is, no penalty can be imposed under Section 11AC, I find that all the clearances were effected by the appellants on record. As such, the fact of clearance of goods exceeding the clearance value of Rs. 1 crore at concess .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of presumption that the appellants would have cleared the same clandestinely is not proper. As such, I set aside the confiscation of the goods. However, admittedly the appellants have not maintained the records in accordance with Central Excise provisions, for which purpose they have to be imposed with nominal amount of penalty. Accordingly, for non- maintenance of records, penalty of Rs. 2,000/- .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X