2004 (1) TMI 404 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Confiscation of unaccounted goods during a factory visit.
2. Imposition of redemption fine and penalty on the Director of the company.
3. Lack of evidence to support the claim of goods being day's production.
4. Legal precedent regarding liability for unaccounted finished goods.

Analysis:
1. The case involved an appeal against the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order regarding the confiscation of 34 A/C Kits found in excess during a Central Excise Department visit to the factory. The adjudicating authority had confiscated the goods and imposed a redemption fine of Rs. 20,000/- along with a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh on the Director of the appellant's Firm.

2. The appellants contended that the excess A/C Kits were their day's production and should not be liable for confiscation. However, the Revenue argued that the appellants failed to produce any record supporting this claim during verification. The Tribunal noted that the unaccounted finished goods are liable for confiscation based on a legal precedent cited from a previous High Court decision.

3. Despite the appellants' plea, the Tribunal found no merit in their claim as they did not provide any evidence to support that the 34 A/C Kits were part of their day's production. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the confiscation of the unaccounted goods but reduced the redemption fine to Rs. 10,000/- considering the circumstances of the case.

4. Regarding the penalty imposed on the Director of the company, the Tribunal observed that there was no finding in the adjudicating order or the order-in-appeal indicating any intention on his part to evade duty payment. As a result, the penalty on the Director was set aside, and the appeals were disposed of accordingly. The decision highlighted the importance of establishing intent in cases involving penalties for duty evasion.