9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (5) TMI 154X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y finished goods but under work-in-progress, for which the allegation of clandestine removal is not sustainable. Similarly, the raw materials found to be short in the course of investigation was only due to bad handling by workmen. Therefore, the order of confiscation with option for release of the goods depositing redemption fine of Rs. 45,000/- (Rupees Forty-five thousand) was uncalled for. Simi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s taken into consideration, the Appellant shall not be deterrently dealt when there was no action by the Department to prove that the finished goods and the inputs were out of the campus/factory of the Appellant. 3. Learned JDR appearing for the Revenue submitted that there was a reckless behaviour on the part of the Appellant when it was found by the Department during the course of investigation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nue was on physical examination during course of inventory taken on 24-9-2001. The excess and deficiency in the finished goods as well as the inputs remain undisputed. However, the learned Commissioner considering the totality of the facts and circumstances came to a finding that the appellant had already deposited the duty on the finished goods and also on raw materials prior to issue of show cau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enty thousand) to meet the ends of justice, setting aside the impugned order directing neither for any confiscation nor for imposition of redemption fine. I order accordingly. 5.1. As observed by the learned Commissioner that the duty on the accounted goods had been paid before issue of the show cause notice, directing the Appellant to further discharge the duty-liability is unwarranted for no ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
