2004 (2) TMI 215

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l, the issue relates to the applicability of the provisions of Rule 173Q to the goods found in excess in the factory premises of the respondents. 2. I have heard both sides and gone through the record. The perusal of the record shows that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of steel re-rolled product, the excisable goods. On 12-2-2001, 33.745 MT of Steel Ingots was found lying excess .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n produced any document regarding the procurement of these goods from M/s. Arora Alloys Ltd. They were required to even account for these goods in their record, even if they are not taken to be the manufacturer of the same. The plea of the respondents, as now put forth by the Counsel, that these goods were the inputs for the manufacture of the final products, cannot be accepted as the Commissioner .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... before the adjudicating authority. 3. For having failed to account for the excisable goods, the adjudicating authority rightly ordered the confiscation of the same and imposed the redemption fine and the penalty. The ratio of the law laid down in the case of C.C.E., Indore v. Ajmer Food Indus., 2004 (60) RLT 297, referred to by the learned Counsel is not attracted to the facts of the present ca .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X