2004 (3) TMI 487

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Heard both sides. 2. Appellant filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi whereby redemption fine of Rs. 75,000/- and penalty of Rs. 75,000/- imposed on the assessee. 3. The contention of the appellant is that the goods found in the factory which is not entered in the St....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) RLT 176. 4. The contention of the Revenue is that demand of duty and confiscation of the goods are two different aspects. The declaration under KVS scheme was accepted in respect of demand of duty, hence the lower authorities rightly ordered the confiscation of the goods, as these goods were not entered in the statutory record. 5. In this case admitted facts of the case are that ....