2004 (6) TMI 139

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s) whereunder, the demand of Rs. 3,78,729/- confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner has been upheld, as also the penalty of Rs. 50,000/-. The demand was raised against the appellants on the ground of delay in receipt of the duty paid goods in the factory for reprocessing after the stipulated period of one year prescribed under Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (Rules) also the failure to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s come on record that the appellants could not complete the processing within the stipulated period of 6 months and they also sought extension of time. Hence, though there was delay in sending the intimation of receipt of duty paid goods, the said goods were physically available in the factory for inspection. In fact, the appellant's claim that the intimation was faxed, which claim is being disput .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tes of the parties as well as Lorry receipt of the transporter to establish duty paid nature and no objection was raised by the visiting Inspector or Superintendent incharge of the Range office regarding duty paying documents. I have considered the submission of both sides, I find that the only infirmity that has been alleged in denying the benefit of Rule 173H is that there was delay either, in i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X