9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (12) TMI 274X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unit could not; give any reason for the said excess than the recorded balance in RG-1 on the ground that he was away for few days and it will be due to negligence of the staff who maintained the rocord. Show cause notice was issued; to the respondents proposing to confiscate the quantity found in excess and demanding duty on the said goods and imposition of penalty on the respondents. The case was adjudicated by the Joint Commissioner who confiscated the goods found in excess and allowed the same to be redeemed on redemption fine and imposed penalty of Rs. 40,000/- on the respondents. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the confiscation of the goods and reduced penalty to Rs. 2000/- relying on the judgment of the Larger Bench o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aling straighten, pickle, condition and inspect. Similarly for slabs and plates after rolling the next process is anneal, flatten, pickle, inspect and then ship. From these processes it is clear that bars as well as slabs and plates after coming into shape are required to be annealed before these are considered as complete finished goods. He also produced the letter of their customer who had written to the respondents that the material should be properly annealed, ultra sound tested and painted. He relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Bajaj Auto Ltd. v. CCE, Pune - 1995 (80) E.L.T. 644 wherein it was held that phosphatizing chrome plating and annealing carried on the studs are incidental and ancillary to the completion of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vade payment of duty. In the present case, I find that there is no evidence, to say that the goods were kept for clandestine removal. I find that in the case of Media Video Ltd. v. CCE, New Delhi (supra), there was clear evidence that the assessee was clearing cassettes clandestinely. Therefore, the cassettes found unaccounted for were held to have been kept for clandestine removal. Therefore, these were held liable for confiscation. However, in the present case, there is no evidence to hold that unaccounted goods were kept for clandestine removal. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) has correctly held that these are not liable for confiscation. I, therefore, reject the appeal of the Revenue. (Pronounced in open Court on 22-12-2004) - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
