TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (9) TMI 394
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Respondent. [Order]. -   This appeal is directed against order in appeal dated 27th February, 2004. The revenue is in appeal against the impugned order which set aside the confiscation and penalties imposed on the respondent. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are the respondent's factory was visited by the officers of Central Excise on 14-8-01 and they noticed that 6....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eals) has set aside the confiscation of the goods and reduced the penalty. Hence, revenue is in appeal. 3. Considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused records. I find from the record that the learned Commissioner (Appeal) has set aside the confiscation on the seized goods by observing that :- "Apart from above the other contention of the Appellants that the 61 Nos. o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he specification and requirement of the customers. If that be so, the non-accounting of the said goods which has yet to undergo the specification testing would in itself will not be violation of provisions of Central Excise Law. The revenue has not brought on record any contrary evidence to indicate that these 61 (sixty one) cushions were in fact ready and packed according to the specification. In....