Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (2) TMI 639 - AT - Central ExciseClandestine removal - job-work - it was alleged that the Appellant had not followed the procedure as prescribed under Rule 10 of the CERT, 2002, therefore, confiscation under Rule 25 of CER, 2002 has rightly been ordered and imposition of penalty also - Held that: - it cannot be said that merely non-following of procedure laid down under Rule 10 CER, 2002 would lead to the inference that these transformers meant to be cleared without payment of duty, in absence of any other evidence and invite harsh action of confiscation of the excess stock found in the premises of the Appellant. Therefore, direction for confiscation of the excess quantity of transformers found the Appellant’s premises is set aside. Undisputedly and admittedly, the Appellants have violated the provisions of Rule 10 of CER, 2002 inasmuch as, challans were not prepared and followed other formalities in the movement of transformers. It is required that proper records has to be maintained for movement of the goods and on receipt of the same against proper documents records to be maintained at the recipient’s end. Thus, in these circumstances, imposition of penalty on the Appellant is sustainable. However, considering overall circumstances, penalty is reduced to ₹ 2,00,000/-. Appeal allowed in part.
|