9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1369X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation it is seen that readymade garments are not specified in the said notification leading to the conclusion that at the relevant time, these goods were not covered under Section 4A - confiscation set aside. The duty is liable to be paid on the subjected goods by considering assessable value of such branded goods at the rate of 60 per cent of the retail sale prices in terms of the Tariff Value fixed by the Government as per N/N. 8/2001/CE(NT) dated 1-3-2001 as amended by N/N. 20/2001 dated 30-4-2001 - Since, the goods have been manufactured during the period when duty was liable to be paid on RMG with brand name, the duty demand amounting to ₹ 2,25,371 raised by the lower authorities under Section 11A of the Central Excise Duty Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er:- i) M/s Om Sai Garments, X-41, Pratap Gali, Gandhi Nagar, Delhi. The Central Excise officers visited the premises and conducted the physical verification of stock. The appellant was found engaged in manufactured of branded and unbranded readymade garments. The visiting staff detained raw material (valued at ₹ 29,26,450/-), semi-finished goods (valued at ₹ 47,91,800/-) and finished goods (valued at ₹ 8,50,000/-) collectively valued at ₹ 85,68,750/- under section 110 of Customs Act, 1962, for further investigation and production of legal documents thereof. The detention was converted into seizure on 03.09.2012. The goods valued at ₹ 4,08,000/- lying with job-workers M/s Sonu Packers were also seized. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere seized on 03.09.2012. The seized goods were provisionally released to appellant vide letter CNO. IV (Hrqs.Prev)15/37/Inv.D-II/2012/1264 dt. 04.09.2012 subject to fulfillment of conditions thereto. The appellant furnished the bank guarantee and B-11 Bond vide their letter dt. 28.09.2012 and took provisional release of seized goods. The show cause notice issued under C.No. IV(Hrqs. Prev)15/37/INV/D-II/2012 dt. 12.02.2013 was adjudicated vide order-in-original No. 103/DMD/2013-14 dt. 17.02.2014 by Ld. Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise Division-VIII, Delhi-II. He demanded duty, imposed redemption fine and penalty. On appeal, Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), New CGO Complex, Faridabad vide Order-in-Appeal No. 29-32/SM/CE/D-II/14 dt. 27 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e garments were seized from 4 premises and subsequently ordered for confiscation by the lower authorities. The reason for such act has been stated as failure to affix MRP on the branded readymade garments by taking the view that these are chargeable to Excise Duty on MRP basis under Section 4A. Section 4A provides for charging Central Excise Duty on goods notified by the Central Government. Only such goods can be notified under Section 4A in relation to which the retail sale price is required to be declared on the package under the provisions of Legal Metrology Act, 2009. The goods which are covered for assessment under Section 4A have been notified by the Government from time to time under notification no. 49/2008 CENT dated 24-12-2008(as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n arrived at on the basis of the documents recovered during search. Since, the goods have been manufactured during the period when duty was liable to be paid on RMG with brand name, the duty demand amounting to ₹ 2,25,371 raised by the lower authorities under Section 11A of the Central Excise Duty Act, 1944 are to be upheld. The penalty imposed on M/s Om Sai Garments as well as M/s Om Sai Traders are also upheld. However, the penalty on Shri Rajiv Khera imposed under Rule 26 is set aside since penalty already stands imposed on the firm. 8. In view of the above discussion, the order for confiscation, is, set aside, the duty and demand penalties upheld as above. 9. In the result appeals are partially allowed. [Order Pronounced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
