TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (5) TMI 571
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ondent. [Order]. - After hearing both sides, I find that the appellants has deposited the entire amount of duty of Rs. 4,67,341/-. As such, I dispense with the condition of pre-deposit of personal penalty of Rs. 50,000/- imposed upon each applicants/appellants and proceed to dispose off their appeals. 2. The appellant's factory was visited by the Central Excise Officers, who conducte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing of an order by the Additional Commissioner confirming demand of duty in respect of clandestinely removed fabrics and imposing penalty of identical amount under the provisions of Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In addition, personal penalty of Rs. 50,000/- was imposed under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The excess found goods totally valued at Rs. 4,99,282/- were confisca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re me. 5. Shri N.J. Gheewala, ld. Consultant appearing for the appellants submits that they are not challenging the finding of the clandestine removal of the fabrics covered under 139 kachcha delivery challans recovered from their premises and are not contesting the demand confirmed on the said ground. However, he submits that there were no justification for confiscation of the excess found ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re capable of manufacturing such a huge quantity of fabrics on one particular day, and such huge quantity have been entered in their RG-1 register earlier also. I also note that no effort has been made by the appellants to show that the raw material for the said fabrics were duly entered in their raw material register. No other evidence has also been produced by them to reflect upon the fact that ....