2000 (7) TMI 346

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....DR, for the Respondent. [Order]. -  Officers of Central Excise, on 3-4-1997, found finished goods in the appellants' factory in excess over the recorded balance in RG.1 Register. Raw-materials were also found unaccounted, in the absence of any records having been maintained by the appellants in respect of raw-materials. Both the finished goods and raw-materials were seized. The adjudica....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty. The said authority also upheld the penalty of Rs. 3,600.00 imposed on the appellants by the adjudicating authority. The present appeal before the Tribunal is against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals). 2.  I have heard ld. Advocate Shri K.C. Sharma for the appellants and ld. JDR Dr. Ravinder Babu for the respondents. Ld. Counsel has reiterated the main ground of the appeal, which....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cate, therefore, prays for setting aside the imposition of redemption fine in respect of raw-materials and also imposition of penalty on the appellants. Ld. JDR has opposed these arguments by submitting that the party had not contested the allegations in the show-cause notice but pleaded for a lenient view while debiting the duty demanded. In view of acceptance of the Department's case by the appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....present plea made by ld. Advocate that the raw-materials were duty-paid and hence not excisable to attract the provisions of Clause (b) ibid. As a result, the decision cited by ld. Advocate namely Devinder Sanitations v. CCE, New Delhi [1996 (88) E.L.T. 589 (T)] becomes distinguishable. I, therefore, uphold the finding of the lower appellate authority that there was no justification for non-accoun....