9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 774X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... K. Mohanty These appeals are directed against the impugned order dated 16.02.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-I. 2. Brief facts of the case are that M/s Nakoda Ferromet (Appellant No.1) is engaged in trading of defective S.S. Scrap and is also registered with the Central Excise Department as a 1st stage dealer. The DGCEI Officers gathered intelligence that one ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 042/-. The said order also imposed penalties of Rs. 1,50,248/- each on the appellants No. 1 & 2 under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. On appeal against the said adjudication order, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned order has upheld the adjudged demands confirmed against the appellants. Hence, these appeals were preferred before this Tribunal. 3. Learned Advocate appearin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts that since the appellants have wrongly issued the invoices in respect of the goods, which were actually not supplied to the buyer, the appellants are exposed to the penal consequences provided in the statute and that denial of credit/confiscation of goods by the authorities below are in conformity with the statute provisions. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. 6. Rule 14 of the Cenv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... toms Act, 1962 provides for confiscation of smuggled goods, when any other goods were used for concealing the same. It is not the case of Revenue that the appellant had used any other goods to conceal the offending goods i.e. "scrap in pressed bundle or loose scraps". Thus, confiscation of goods under Section 119 ibid is not proper and justified and accordingly, imposition of redemption fine will ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
