TMI Blog2009 (6) TMI 271X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arty to pay 25% of the duty as penalty within 30 days. In the present case, it is clearly evident that the goods are cleared clandestinely and, therefore, penalty under Section 11AC of the Act is warranted. It is noted that the respondents have already deposited the duty along with penalty of 25% of duty amount as penalty. In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of K.P. Pouches (P) Ltd. penalty of 25% of duty is warranted. – Raw materials confiscated under rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - Regarding confiscation of the raw material the learned Advocate submits that they have not availed any benefit on the seized raw material - We agree with the learned Advocate that Rule 25, under which the semi-finished pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed this appeal for imposition of the penalty, interest and confiscation of the goods. 2. After hearing both sides and on perusal of the records, I find that the goods were cleared on the basis of parallel challans without payment of duty. Thus, it is a case of clandestine removal of goods. Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 provides penalty for short levy or non-levy of duty by reasons of fraud, collusion or any wilful misstatement or suppression of fact with intent to evade payment of duty and penalty is liable to equal to the duty so determined. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of K.P. Pouches (P) Ltd. v. UOI and Anrs. - 2008 (228) E.L.T. 31 (Del.) = 2008 (85) RLT 483 (Del.) held that in terms of 1st proviso to Section 11A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... option to the appellant to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 6 lakhs, the appellants have contested that there is no provision for confiscation of raw materials or semi-finished goods and Rule 173Q/Rule 25 provides for confiscation of finished goods only. For the above proposition, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Birla Yamaha Works v. CCE, Meerut reported in 2005 (183) E.L.T. 194 (Tri.-Del.). We agree with the learned Advocate that Rule 25, under which the semi-finished processed goods has been confiscated is applicable only to finished excisable goods. As such, we set aside the confiscation and consequent redemption fine in respect of the said goods." Hence, Commissioner (Appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
