9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (9) TMI 155X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecord. The adjudicating authority after issuing a show cause notice confiscated the goods found in excess and imposed penalty. Appellants filed appeals and the Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned order set aside the confiscation in respect of the inputs and upheld the confiscation of finished goods found in excess to RG-I record, and reduces the amount of penalty. 3. Heard both sides. 4. The only issue involved in these appeals is whether finished goods which were found in excess were liable for confiscation and the appellants were also liable for penalty. The appellants relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Pepsi Foods v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh, reported in 2002 (139) E.L.T. 658 (T) to submit that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as non-excisable held that when the goods are non-excisable, the goods are not liable for confiscation. The facts that the goods were non-excisable by the Revenue for a years together and, thereafter, the Revenue change his opinion and regarding change of classification separate show cause notice was issued which was pending for adjudication. In this situation the confiscation was set aside. The facts of the present case are not parallel to the facts of the case before the Hon'ble High Court. On the other hand, the Revenue relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble High Court, Bombay in the case of Kirloskar Brothers Ltd. v. Union of India and Others, reported in 1988 (34) E.L.T. 30 (Bom.) which was followed by the Tribunal in the case of Medi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... those manufacturers who come under the scheme of self-removal, the excise goods are permitted to be removed by merely posting the necessary credit entries in the statutory books showing the excise duty payable to the Government. This is a scheme which depends for its operation on the honesty of the manufacturers. The Excise Rules, which provide for this scheme, must be interpreted in such a way as to ensure their usefulness and enforcement. If the presence of manufacturer's guilty mind is made by judicial process an essential ingredient of an act of violation of these, rules, then the enforcement of these rules will largely become impossible. There is no textual warrant for such judicial interpretation." 7. In another case Hon'ble Bombay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
