9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 552X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent. ORDER After dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of penalty of Rs. 1,66,860/- imposed on applicant-appellant in terms of provisions of Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, I proceed to decide the appeal itself with the consent of both the sides as a short issue is involved. 2. The applicant is a transporter and was carrying a consignment of 36 bags on behalf of Vardhman Enterp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spect of the said goods seized by the officers from the appellant's truck. However, proceedings were initiated for imposition of penalty that the Rajnigandha being transported by them, was of non-duty paid character. The said proceedings resulted in imposition of penalty by the original adjudicating authority and confirmation of the same by appellate authority. 5. Surprisingly, no duty confi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e disclosure of the goods made by the consignor. The transporter cannot be expected to act like an excise officer to find out the duty paid or non-duty paid character of the goods before accepting booking of the goods and before transportation of the same. As such I find no justifiable reasons and on the contrary I find that the appellant has been put to unnecessary harassment and litigation by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
