TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (1) TMI 582
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ellants manufacture Motor vehicle parts and avail of Modvat credit of the duty paid on inputs; that the Central Excise Officers visited their unit on 4-12-93 and found that RG 1 register was written up to 30-11-93, finished goods valued at Rs. 80,234.22 were found in excess of the stock entered in RG I and the goods valued at Rs. 4,87,801/- removed under GP I Nos. 838 to 845 from 1-12-93 to 3-12-93 was not recorded in RG I register. He submitted that production for 1-12-93 to 3-12-93 was recorded in production slips which were resumed by the Central Excise officers; that taking into account the production recorded in production slips and clearances made by them, there was neither any excess nor any shortage; that the Joint Commissione....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er Notification No. 6/97-C.E. (N.T.) dated 1-3-97 whereas the inputs were sent by them in 1993. He relied upon the decision in the case of Asia Brown Boveri Ltd. v. CCE, Calcutta-I, [2001 (137) E.L.T. 384 (T) = 2000 (41) RLT 325 (CEGAT)] wherein has been held that there is condition in Rule 57F(3) at the relevant time providing for return of inputs within 60 days and it cannot, therefore, be alleged that the appellants had contravened the provisions of Rule 57F "so as to deny them the benefit of Modvat credit. The Circulars and Trade Notices are issued for the conveniences of the Administration and cannot be said to have formed the condition in the provisions of the relevant Rules." Reliance has also been placed on the decision in the case ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e imposable on the defaulter; that it has been held by the Appellate Tribunal in the case of CCE, Jaipur v. Mittal Laminates (P) Ltd. - 1999 (105) E.L.T. 408 (Tri.) that "once the goods have reached the stage of fully finished, they are required to be recorded in the prescribed records. Since they were not recorded in the prescribed records, therefore a demand or otherwise for clandestine removal is not required to be proved. In the circumstances, I hold that the goods were liable to confiscation and should have been confiscated." Regarding non-receipt of the inputs after being processed by the job worker within 60 days, the learned Senior Departmental Representative submitted that under Rule 57F of the Central Excise Rules at the mat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e works could be carried out there is no reason why the entries cannot be made on daily basis in the RG-I register which is a statutory requirement under Rule 53 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Accordingly the excisable goods which were found not entered in the statutory records are liable to confiscation both under Rules 173Q and 226 of the Central Excise Rules. It has been held by the Supreme Court in the case of Junjarrao Bhikaji Nagarkar v. Union of India [1999 (112) E.L.T. 772 (S.C.)] that "when we examine Rule 173Q, it does appear to us that apart from the offending goods which are liable to confiscation the person concerned with that shall be liable to penalty up to the amount specified in the Rule. It is difficult to accept the a....