2000 (7) TMI 341

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. -  The facts in brief in this appeal are that M/s. Gurind India (P) Ltd., Noida - the respondants herein, manufacture glass products falling under SH No. 70. Their factory premises were visited by the Central Excise officers on 18-10-93. On stock verification of the finished goods, the following discrepancies were noticed : (i)  &nbs....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he duty of Rs. 21,432.35 on their assorted glass found short. He also imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- on the party. 3. The party filed an appeal against the above order before Commissioner (Appeals), Ghaziabad. The appellate authority - but for upholding the penalty amount, allowed the appeal of the party setting aside the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner. 4. The Revenue....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntral Excise Rules. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions made before. The Commissioner (Appeals), in his order dated 6-6-96 in this case, has granted relief to the party in following terms : "I have gone through the records of the case and considered the matter. It is a fact that product of the appellant i.e. glass is fragile in nature and occurrence of breakage, damage, scrat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... this regard is sustainable." 6. The above findings in the order of the Commissioner are on appreciation of the facts before him. It is observed that excess quantity, of the finished goods was still within the factory premises and there is no allegation that this was intended to be removed without following the prescribed procedure or without payment of duty. The Assistant Commissioner has....