TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 688X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scation of the goods on the ground that the entries are not properly made. However, every failure to make the entry or every defect therein does not constitute the basis for confiscation of the goods, as long as they are not removed from the premises. It is too fundamental to be reaffirmed that the liability to pay the excise duty arises only when the manufactured goods are removed from the premis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i, Senior Counsel and Smt. Divya Datla, for the Respondent. JUDGMENT This reference is made at the instance of the Department under Section 35H(1) of the Central Excise Act, as it stood in the year 2003, with a request to direct the Customs, Excise Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Bangalore (for short 'CEGAT') to refer the following questions to this Court : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the explanation was not satisfactory, an order of confiscation was passed on 27-3-1996. Aggrieved by that, the respondent filed Appeal No. 335/96(H)CE before the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Hyderabad. The appeal was allowed through order, dated 20-8-1998. Thereupon, the Department carried the matter in further appeal to CEGAT. The appeal was rejected through order, dated 3-9-200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the prescribed form. 5. Assuming that there was some delay in making entries in the relevant form, the goods were not liable for confiscation. Rule 173Q of the Rules no doubt empowers confiscation of the goods on the ground that the entries are not properly made. However, every failure to make the entry or every defect therein does not constitute the basis for confiscation of the goods, as l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
