Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (4) TMI 452 - CESTAT CHENNAI

2015 (4) TMI 452 - CESTAT CHENNAI - TMI - Confication of goods - Imposition of redemption fine and penalty - detection of excess stock of branded chewing tobacco - Incomplete books of accounts - Held that:- When the accounts were not updated and excess quantity of goods were found during inventory, preponderance of probability was in favour of Revenue to hold possible circumstance of clandestine removal. In absence of any reconciliation statement of the excess goods found, it was not open to the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ellant s goods were liable to confiscation and redeemable on payment of redemption fine. Therefore, both seizure and imposition of redemption fine is confirmed.

Present case being the case of tobacco product which has higher margin in the market, there shall be no interference to the adjudicated fine since the appellant did not come out to show the extent of margin earned in dealing with Tobacco products. Therefore, there is no necessity to intervene to the decision of learned adjudic .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

decide both stay application and appeal on merit. 2. Heard Revenue. 3. Record reveals that there was detection of excess stock of branded chewing tobacco. At the time of investigation by the investigating authority that remained undisputed. Learned adjudicating authority has recorded the reason why such excess stock was confiscable. The appellant explained that the goods were entered in RG-I Register maintained upto 5.9.2011 but that could not be updated in view of absence of the concerned part .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e adjudicating authority. He is not precluded to act as such and not prohibited to exercising the power of adjudication. Therefore, appellant s plea on such count is dismissed. 6. When the accounts were not updated and excess quantity of goods were found during inventory, preponderance of probability was in favour of Revenue to hold possible circumstance of clandestine removal. In absence of any reconciliation statement of the excess goods found, it was not open to the appellant to challenge tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to confiscation and redeemable on payment of redemption fine. Therefore, both seizure and imposition of redemption fine is confirmed. 7. So far as quantum of redemption fine is concerned, appellant says that because the Bangalore Bench of Tribunal has ordered 10% of the value of the goods to be redemption fine that provides basis. It may be stated that redemption fine cannot to mechanically imposed by a formula to each case. Hon ble Supreme Court held that there cannot be a straight jacket formu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version