Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 161 - CESTAT ALLAHABADPenalty u/r 26 of CER - Clandestine removal - no confiscation order - case of appellant is that in the absence of any order of confiscation of goods, the provisions of Rule 26 cannot be invoked - Held that:- The said Rule can be invoked when a person deals with the excisable goods in the manner as mentioned in the said Rules and has reasons to believe that the goods are liable to confiscation - As such the only criteria for invocation of said rule is the belief/knowledge of the person as regard the liability of the goods to confiscation. There is no requirement in the said rule 26 as regards the proposal in the Show Cause Notice to confiscate the goods or order of the Adjudicating Authority for confiscation. Admittedly in the present case Shri Suraj Prakash has dealt with the goods in a manner which has made the goods liable to confiscation - In a situation where the clandestinely removed goods are no longer available, there can be no proposal to confiscate the same or no order confiscating the same. It does not mean that the person, who is otherwise liable to penalty, would escape the same on the sole ground that he has been successful in the past to clandestinely remove the goods without any interception by the Revenue Authorities. Penalty upheld - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|