9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (10) TMI 508X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant has by letter, dated 25-5-1999 submitted certain written arguments and has prayed for a decision in the matter on merits. 2. I have heard learned JDR Mrs. Aruna Gupta and have perused the records. 3. In the written submissions, the appellant has stated that the Commissioner has himself in the impugned order observed that the power of confiscation did not extend to goods which were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was only after folding and measurement at the end of the day and not during the day, non-maintenance of records was not established in terms of Rules 53 and 226 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Penalty was also set aside by the said order. 4. The appellant has further submitted that since contravention of Rules 53 and 226 against the manufacturers viz., M/s. Prince Printers has not been es ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s as well as on Shri Bhagatram Agarwal, Manager (the present appellant) under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules. It is seen from the order sheet, dated 13-8-1999 that the appeal filed by M/s. Prince Printers had been rejected earlier and the ROA filed by them had also been rejected, thereafter. 8. On a consideration of the written submissions made by the present appellant, I find that in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
