2009 (7) TMI 982 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal rules against Revenue in brass pipes case, highlighting need for intent in excise penalty.

The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order in a case involving excess brass pipes at a manufacturing unit. The Revenue failed to prove an ... Confiscation and penalty - Non-accountal of goods Issues involved: Appeal against order of Commissioner (Appeals) regarding confiscation of excess brass pipes, duty confirmation, and penalty imposition.Summary:Confiscation of Excess Goods:The case involved a manufacturing unit dealing with copper and brass pipes and tubes where officers found 4635 Kgs. of brass pipes in excess during a visit. A show cause notice was issued proposing confiscation of the excess goods, duty confirmation, and penalty imposition. The Deputy Commissioner confirmed duty and allowed redemption of goods on payment of a fine. The appeal was filed against this order.Non-Disclosure of Goods Origin:The Revenue contended that the goods were received from a job worker under section 57F(2), which was not disclosed by the Manager of the assessee during the investigation. The Manager admitted to the offense of non-accounting of excisable finished goods. The Commissioner (Appeals) was criticized for extending the benefit of doubt to the appellant.Decision:The Tribunal found that the Revenue failed to provide evidence showing any intention to clear the goods without payment of duty. The Manager's admission did not indicate any malicious intent behind the non-accounting. Merely not entering the goods in the RG-1 record should not lead to confiscation or penalty imposition. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and rejected the appeal filed by the Revenue.This judgment highlights the importance of establishing intent and mala fide actions in cases of non-compliance with excise regulations before imposing penalties or confiscation of goods.