9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (8) TMI 218X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sented by V.S. Sejpal, Advocate. The respondents manufactured Diesel Generating Sets. On a visit, it was found that certain sets apparently in fully manufactured condition, had not been entered in the RG-1 register. These goods were confiscated but were allowed redemption on payment of fine. A penalty was also imposed on the assessees. Duty paid at the time of provisional release of the goods was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h the RG. 1 stage until completion of inspection had not been accepted by the Tribunal. The justification for imposition of penalty, etc., in such cases was made citing the case of Ganga Rubber Industries v. Collector of Central Excise [1989 (39) E.L.T. 650 (Tribunal)]. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions. The goods are required to be entered in statutory register as soon as they are f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is shown that these goods do so, they cannot become marketable. 6. There was a time when physical completion of goods was considered sufficient for duty to be attracted. At a later date the Supreme Court introduced the concept of marketability. Thus even when the goods are completely manufactured but where they cannot be marketed duty cannot be attracted. 7. Even at the earlier stages there w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nue is that the Commissioner had erred in finding fault with the Dy. Commissioner where the latter had confirmed the duty already deposited. I find that the confirmation of the duty made by the Dy. Commissioner was correct in law. He was required to show adjustment of the duty paid which he had done. The Commissioner's remarks on that aspect are not correct and are ordered to be removed from the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
