9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 369X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the Hon'ble CESTAT was justified in upholding Commissioner (Appeal's) order inasmuch as setting aside the order for confiscation of seized goods and imposition of redemption fine? B. Whether the Hon'ble CESTAT was justified in upholding the order of the Commissioner (Appeal's) order inasmuch as reducing penalty imposed on the respondent under Rule 173Q(1) of Central Excise Rules, 1944 for non- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed condition and they had not been entered in RG-1 Register. That in the circumstances, the adjudicating authorities were justified in ordering confiscation of goods as well as directing payment of redemption fine and levying penalty under Rule 173Q(1) read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. 3. The Commissioner (Appeals) has recorded the findings as under : "On 30-7-96 at about 19.00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lan, Manager under Rule 209-A and Rule 173Q(1). 2. I find that invoice No. 821 823 the duty was debited on the same day and there was enough balance to cover the clearances and therefore I can-not considered these clearances to be clandestine clearances with intent to evade duty as the invoice was prepared showing all particulars correctly except for debiting the same, which would be the last ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nfirmed by the Tribunal. Thus, it is apparent that both the appellate authorities have concurrently found on facts that "firstly, the entry did not take place in RG-23A Register as the Excise Clerk had left for a short period when the surprise inspection took place, and secondly, the fact of the goods in fully manufactured condition and ready for dispatch was contested by the respondent-assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
