9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 551X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... GEMENT Per Ms. Archana Wadhwa: Both the appeals are being disposed of by a common order as they arise out of the same impugned order. 2. M/s Vikrama Prasad Vinod Kumar is engaged in the manufacture of Deshi Pan Samagri, Zarda and Chewing Tobacco. The said unit is a proprietory firm of Shri Pramod Kumar. 3. The business premises of the appellant were visited by the Central Excise Officers on 24 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... released provisionally after taking cash security of Rs. 3,51,550/- and on execution of Bond. 4. On the above basis Show Cause Notice dated 03.11.2009 was issued proposing confiscation of the seized goods as also for imposition of penalty. The said show cause notice resulted in passing of an order by the Assistant Commissioner confiscating the seized excisable goods with an option to redeem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid raw material belonging to M/s. S.R. Sons was found kept in the ground floor belonging to M/s. Vikram Prasad Vinod Kumar. 5. The above order by the Assistant Commissioner was upheld by Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeal. 6. After hearing both the sides, I find that the only issue to be decided is as to whether the seized goods, which was kept at the first floor of the registered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the goods were temporarily shifted to the first floor, for which the appellant has given an explanation, I find that there is no evidence on record to show that such shifting was with malafide intention or the appellant was in preparation to remove the goods subsequently. If the same were to be removed subsequently, the appellant could have the removed the same from the ground floor itself and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant have transferred the goods to the first floor without the permission of the officers which is a procedural and technical laps, the same requires imposition of token penalty, in terms of provision of Rule 27, which provides a maximum penalty of Rs. 5,000/-. Accordingly penalty on M/s. Vikram Prasad Vinod Kumar is reduced to Rs. 5,000/-. 9. In view of the above, both the appeals are disposed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
