2002 (8) TMI 498

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ts made a request to decide the appeal on merits. 2. Heard learned JDR and perused the appeal papers. 3. Revenue filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the confiscation of the goods found unaccounted in the factory was set aside. The Revenue relied upon the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Kirloskar Brothers Ltd. v. Un .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The Bombay High Court in the case of Kirloskar Brothers Ltd. v. Union of India (supra) relied upon by the Revenue held that sub-rules (1)(a), (b) and (c) of Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules do not admittedly use the expression "with intent to evade payment of duty", which is found in clause (d). It can, therefore, be prima facie, assumed that the liability in terms of Rule 173Q(1), sub-clauses (a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X