9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 840X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the factory premises of one M/s. Pymen Cable (India), Delhi, from where they recovered wires and cables valued at Rs. 1,71,844/-, which was found to be in excess. On the same day, the godown of M/s. Metro Electricals Pvt. Ltd. (Metro), a trading company were also searched and seized recovered wire and cables valued at Rs. 73,28,787/-. Thereafter a show cause notice was issued to the appellants for initiation of proceedings against them. The show cause notice was adjudicated and goods were seized, various penalties were also imposed on the appellants. The said order was challenged before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) who hold that goods worth Rs. 18,27,926/- is liable for confiscation out of seized goods valued at Rs. 73,28,787/-, and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that as M/s. Metro is engaged in the trading of wire and cable since 1998 and also traded goods of Rs. 8.50 crore and selling wire and cables after cutting the cable placed on spools at the requirement of the customers. There is marginal difference of wire and cable sold in length, on this account due to the reason that wire and cable on spools is having marginal excesses, the difference in stock of Rs. 18,27,926/- when compared to the total purchase of Rs. 8.5 crores worked out to be 2%. Therefore, it cannot be said that goods in question is not duty paid stock. Learned Commissioner (Appeals)has not given any credence to these submissions and there is no other evidence on record to show that M/s. Metro has purchased such a stock without ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter thorough investigation, the adjudicating authority confirmed the charge of clandestine removal of goods. On appeals, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the allegation of clandestine removal against M/s. Pymen Cables is based on presumption and surmises. As the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has dropped the charge of clandestine removal of goods, in these circumstances, the penalty on Shri Vinod Garg, Proprietor of M/s. Pymen Cables is not imposable when Shri Vinod Garg is not involved in the activity of clandestine removal. 8. I also find that in this case, out of total seized goods of Rs. 73,28,787/-, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) held that goods amounting to Rs. 18,27,926/- is liable for confiscation on the gro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
