TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal allowed, order set aside for confiscation of goods. Appellant wins on Rule 55 argument.</h1> The appeal was allowed as the Tribunal set aside the order confiscating unaccounted goods and imposing a penalty. The appellant successfully argued that ... Tobacco - Daily Account Issues:1. Confiscation of unaccounted goods and imposition of penalty.2. Contravention of Central Excise Rules regarding maintenance of stock records.3. Interpretation of Rule 55 of Central Excise Rules.4. Applicability of Trade Notices and Circulars in determining principal raw materials.Analysis:1. The appellant appealed against an adjudication order where unaccounted goods were confiscated, including cigarette tissue paper, filter tip paper, and filter rods, with a redemption fine imposed along with a penalty of Rs. 10,000. The officers found discrepancies in the stock during a visit to the factory, leading to the show cause notice for contravention of Central Excise Rules.2. The appellant argued that on the date of the visit, only cut tobacco was considered the principal raw material under Rule 55 of Central Excise Rules. They contended that the confiscation of materials not prescribed as principal raw material before the issuance of Trade Notices was not justified. The Revenue claimed that the appellant failed to maintain stock records as required by Rule 94, justifying the confiscation of unaccounted materials.3. The Tribunal noted that on the visit date, materials like cigarette tissue paper and filter rods were not properly recorded, as only cut tobacco was considered the principal raw material. However, Trade Notices issued later prescribed additional materials as principal raw materials. The absence of evidence, such as Trade Notices or Circulars on the visit date, regarding the newly prescribed materials led to the setting aside of the impugned order and allowing the appeal.4. The judgment highlights the importance of adherence to prescribed rules and notifications in determining the liability for confiscation of unaccounted goods. The lack of specific directives at the time of the visit regarding the additional materials as principal raw materials favored the appellant's argument, resulting in the reversal of the decision based on the evolving requirements under Central Excise Rules.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
