9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 250X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs.8 crores. In addition, penalty of Rs.1.50 crores stands imposed upon the appellant in terms of Rule 173Q of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2. As per facts on record, the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of MDF boards falling under Chapter 44 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Their factory was visited by the officers of DGCEI on 27.03.11 and 16,708.106 MT MDF boards totally valued Rs.32,35,61,914/- were found to be lying in the open outside the store room. The statement of Shri P.R.Biswar, Deputy Manager (Excise) was recorded wherein he deposed that the goods found in the open were still in the charge of production department in as much as the same were not finish ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were yet to be handed over to the quality control department which conducts certain tests on the said goods for physical and strength properties. He explained that the said goods in process cannot be entered in RG-1 register as they had to reduce the size and finish the same as per the demand of the market. 5. The officers examined the said goods visually and found that there was no apparent difference in the physical properties including finished and smoothness of its surface. According to officers, the goods were properly sanded and cut into standard sizes. In as much as the same were not entered in RG-1 register, the officers detained the same under detention memo dtd. 20.04.01. 6. Thereafter the records recovered from th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that the goods were the production of the last 3-4 years, when they were exporting the same and have got accumulated on account of cancellation of export orders. However, the Commissioner has not accepted the above stand of the appellant on the ground that as per the visual examination of the goods by the officers, they appeared to be properly sanded and in finished condition. 9. We find that Revenue has nowhere contended that the goods were of recent manufacture. The appellant s stand that they were manufactured for last 3-4 years stands accepted. If that be so, we really fail to understand as to how the allegations of clandestine removal without making their entry in RG-1 register can sustain. If there was any intention on the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
