9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 621X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent ORDER The appeal is against order dated 14/08/2015 of Commissioner (Appeals), Raipur. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of motor vehicle parts. Certain investigations were conducted in January 2013 by the officers. It was revealed that the appellants were buying various auto parts from different places, affixed their brand and MRP, after packing these parts. The branded, packe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder upheld the original order. 2. The learned Counsel for the appellant mainly submitted on the following ground :- (a) there is no provision to seize and confiscate raw materials valued at Rs. 4,00,240/-. He relied on Tribunal's decision in Anchal Prints Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Surat - I reported in 2009 E.L.T. 117 (Tri. - Ahmd.); (b) the redemption fine and penalty of Rs. 15 lakhs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spectively, is normal and justified. The appellants are engaged in this process of manufacture for the past many years and, hence, cannot claim ignorance of legal provisions. 4. Heard both the sides and examined appeal records. The admitted facts of the case are that the appellants are liable for Central Excise duty on the repacked auto components cleared by them. Goods valued at Rs. 96,23,089/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fine imposed can be reduced to Rs. 10 lakhs and the penalty accordingly may be reduced to Rs. 5 lakhs in the facts and circumstance of the case. 6. Regarding the plea of the appellant to allow Cenvat credit on the inputs, I find that this issue has not been the subject matter or proceedings before the Original Authority. Based on the plea made by the appellant, the Appellate Authority gave ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
