2015 (10) TMI 1251

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... G R Singh, AR ORDER Per Ashok Jindal :     The appellant is in appeal against imposition of Redemption fine and penalty on the appellant on the premise that the excess stock found in their factory is meant for clandestine removal. 2. The facts of the case are that on 15.11.2008, the visit was conducted at the factory premises of appellant wherein finished stock was accou .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... issioner (Appeals).Aggrieved from the said order, appellant is before me. 3. None appeared on behalf of the appellant but the appellant has filed written submissions in support of their appeal. 4. On the other hand, learned AR reiterated the finding of the impugned order. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by learned AR. 6. I find that in this case, the facts  which .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nufacturing 9000 to 10000 pieces per day and they are entering the quantity manufactured in a day at the end of the day. In these circumstances, without ascertaining the production of the day, from the records, the demand against the appellant is not sustainable. Hence goods are not liable for confiscation and thus question of imposition of redemption fine and penalty does not arise. 7. In these .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X