TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (8) TMI 425
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Respondent. [Order]. - This is an appeal against confiscation of goods and imposition of penalty. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that M/s. Bansal Traders are engaged in the manufacture of super enamelled copper wires. On a visit of the Central Excise Officers to the factory premises of the appellants a physical verification was conducted. It was found that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (Appeals), the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the confiscation for not filing the classification/declarations under Rule 173B. He also confirmed the penalty on the company but set aside imposition of penalty on Shri Vijay Bansal. 3. Arguing the case for the appellants, Shri V.K. Gupta, ld. Advocate submits that in the present case, the allegation of the department is that the appellants ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the brand name "VPI". Ld. DR submits that the appellants claimed the benefit of SSI exemption, therefore, the declaration was incorrect and that the authorities below have rightly confiscated the goods and imposed penalty. 5. After hearing both the sides and considering evidence on records, I find that the only Rule, if any, attracted for violation is Rule 173B. In terms of Rule 173B a dec....