9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (6) TMI 35X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erated waters falling under Chapter heading 22 of the Schedule to the CET Act, 1985. (a) The said goods were cleared with the brand name "TORINO" "TEACHERS". It was found that these brand names were registered trade name of M/s. Bangalore Soft Drinks Pvt. Ltd. and hence they were not eligible for the benefit of the SSI Exemption Notification No. 16/97-CE dated 1.4.1997 (b) Besides this allegation, it was found that they had also clandestinely removed goods without paying duty and the allegation to support this ground was based on the shortage of crown corks. The defence taken that they were damages to the extent of 35% was not accepted. (c) The third allegation is with regard to valuation of the goods which had to be adopted in terms of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... There is no evidence of flow back of money. He also relied on large number of judgments to contend that demands cannot be confirmed in absence of any evidence. 6. The learned SDR did not seriously contest this issue. 7. On a careful consideration, we are of the considered opinion that the demands on clandestine removal of goods solely based on shortages of crown corks cannot be held in view of the fact that there is no collaborative evidence in favour of Revenue. There is no admission of any clearances made clandestinely and hence, in view of the large number of settled judgment on this ground, the demands raised on the allegation of clandestine removal is set aside. (c) Applicability of Section 4A 8. As regard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; Non- entry in the RG1 Register 11. The learned Counsel submitted that the goods which were ready for removal but entries having not been made in the RG 1Register is no ground for confiscation and imposition of penalty and fine and hence, he prayed for setting aside the redemption fine imposed. 12. The learned SDR defended the order and contended that the goods had already been made ready for despatch and hence, non-entry in the RG1 Register is an offence and its confiscation and imposition of fine is justified. 13. On a careful consideration, we agree with learned SDR that the order of confiscation of goods which had been ready for pack for removal and its non-entry in the RG1 Register is liable for confiscation and i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
