2007 (10) TMI 178

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d 30-8-2005.     2.     The relevant facts of the case in brief are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of tapes and cocks classifiable under Chapter Heading No. 8481.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. On 29-5-2004, the Central Excise Officers verified the stocks of the appellants factory and found shortage of the finished goods involving .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the Central Excise Act, 2002, which suggests minimum penalty of Rs.10,000/-. He relied upon the decision of the Tribunal as follows   (1)   Manoj  Jaiswal -2007 (213) E.L.T. 115 (T-D)  (2)   Sarjoo Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. 2006 (204) E.L.T. 478 (T-D)    6.      After hearing the id. DR and on perusal of the records, it is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Excise Rules, 1944 would constitute minimum penalty is require to be imposed. 7. In view of the above. I find that the reduction of the penalty by the Commissioner (Appeals) less than Rs. 10,000/- is not sustainable. Accordingly, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) to the extent of reduction of penalty to Rs. 4,000/- is set aside. The order of the adjudicating authority imposing penalty of R .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X