9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1555X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fully following the ratio laid down by the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal, it is found that the seized goods were not ready for removal from the factory but waiting for order confirmation from the customers. For non-maintenance of record, penalty under the provision of Rule 25 is imposable. Therefore, the penalty is reduced under the said provision on M/s. Aaditiya Aswin Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. to ₹ 2,500/- and the redemption fine is waived. - Decided partly in favour of assessee - Appeal No. E/42369/2014 - Final Order No. 41768/2015 - Dated:- 19-11-2015 - P. K. Choudhary, Member (J) For the Appellant : Mr. J. Shankararaman, Adv For the Respondent : Mr. R. Subramaniyan, AC (AR) ORDER This is an appeal filed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e cleared the said goods from the factory without properly accounting them in the RG1 register and they had no intention to evade payment of duty by any means. He also drew my attention to the statement of Shri P. Devraj, Dy. G.M., of the appellant factory, wherein he has submitted that the stock is well accounted for in the computer system maintained in the factory and covers the quantity of 22.815 MTs. This would also be properly accounted in the RG1 register and would be cleared under proper invoices. He further submits that the penalty imposed is quite harsh and the same should be completely waived or a token penalty may be imposed. He relied on the decision of Camex Intermediates Ltd. Vs. CCE, Surat-II - 2008 (221) ELT 588 (Tri.-Ahmd.) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of Camex Intermediates Ltd. (supra), wherein the Tribunal held as under:- 5. Apart from the above, I find that the authorities below have also confiscated the excess found raw materials along with confirmation of demand of duty of excise in respect of the same under the provision of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. These raw materials are not manufactured by the appellants. I fail to understand as to how their non-entry in the statutory records made the appellant liable to pay duty of excise in respect of the same. Even the confiscation of the same under the provisions of Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 is not warranted inasmuch as the said provisions provides for the finished goods and not the raw material as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
