2005 (2) TMI 310

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Rs. 2 lakhs and imposition of penalty. The appellant's case all through was that the items in question were unfinished, unpacked untested condition and therefore they were not required to be entered in the production record (RG 23-I). The impugned orders did not accept the appellant's submission and noted that at each and every stage account is to be kept. The observation in the Commissioner (Ap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed Chartered Accountant is that it is not practicable to record production at "each and every stage of production". 2. The perusal of the records makes it clear that the appellant's grievance is justified. The seizure of the goods was made by the visiting Officers on 16-9-1999. The very next day, the appellant send the following fax message to Dr. Anil Kumar Nigam, Dy. Commissioner of Central Ex .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ot be interpreted in the way done by the Commissioner. If an assessee is to enter production "at each and every stage of manufacture" and detailed accounts are to be kept of, every process it would become impossible to carry out any manufacture, inasmuch as account keeping would take over manufacture. The interpretation of law placed by the Commissioner is clearly untenable. Rule requires entering .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X