TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1010X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. 8839 Kgs. as per the job challan could not have been loaded in the said vehicles. Otherwise also, there was no evidence regarding the readiness of job worked material to be transported to the principal manufacturer. Hence it cannot be said that the job worked material was indeed ready to be dispatched. It is on this basis that the Order-in-Original was modified. The appellant was under bonafide understanding about no duty liability on his part on amount of subsidy by including it in the transaction value. Thus, even the order of confiscating the Truck, however, permitting redemption thereof is also not sustainable. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No. 53281 of 2018 [SM] - Final Order No. 51662/2019 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hiwadi got an intelligence about two vehicles bearing registration No. RJ-02-GA 9243 and RJ 26 GA - 1783 loaded with copper rods and having documents for destination at Nimrana to have to be unloaded in the premises of M/s. Shree Om Wires Pvt. Ltd at Khushkhera Industrial Area, Bhiwadi in the evening of 23.12.2014. Accordingly, both the vehicles were chased by the Officers. When both of them reached the factory premises, one entered inside and another got parked outside, that the said Officers also entered the factory premises of M/s. Shree Om Wire Pvt. Ltd. and examined the documents. They formed an opinion that the raw-material was received in the factory premises of M/s. Shree Om Wires Pvt. Ltd. without proper invoice/ documents, w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... view of the order under challenge as well as the final order with respect to four of the co-noticees, it stands clear on record that penalty against the present appellant stands already waived by the Order under challenge bearing No.102-106/2018 dated 01.03.2018. Hence, there seems no reason to still be aggrieved about imposition of penalty. It is further observed that in para 7 of the Order-in Appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) has already formed an opinion that the job worked material i.e. 8839 Kgs. as per the job challan could not have been loaded in the said vehicles. Otherwise also, there was no evidence regarding the readiness of job worked material to be transported to the principal manufacturer. Hence it cannot be said that the job work ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
