TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 684X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hes. Further, he also upheld imposition of penalty of ₹ 40,000/- on the appellant. From the record, it is found that though the samples of the seized goods were taken the same were not sent for chemical examination by CRCL, New Delhi and market opinions were obtained. There is no provision in Central Excise law to decide the chemical composition of the goods on the basis of market opinion. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the present appeal and earlier said final order are arising out of same fact of the investigation and therefore, the findings of said final order are relevant for deciding the present appeal. It was submitted by Revenue through their learned Authorized Representative Shri Anupam Kumar Tiwari that final order was in respect of demand of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lying with him and the same are of no use and he does not wish to redeem the same. He has further submitted that during the investigation and at the time of search and seizer samples of the goods were drawn. However, the said samples were not sent for chemical examination by CRCL, New Delhi and therefore, it is not established beyond doubt that the same were pouches of chewing tobacco. He has fur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issioner (Appeals) has upheld confiscation is not sustainable. 5. Learned A.R. has submitted that though samples were not sent for examination to CRCL, New Delhi, market opinions were obtained. 6. I have carefully gone through the records of the case and submissions made. Through the impugned order, learned Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld confiscation on seized goods worth ₹ 80,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
