2007 (6) TMI 479

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri Samir Chitkara, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of MMF (Processed) fabric, falling under Chapter 54 of Central Excise Tariff Act. Their factory was visited by the Central Excise officers on 19-1-02. As a result of various checks and verifications conducted, 646 pieces of processed fabrics measuring 58.148 L. Mtrs. were found in excess tha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the processed fabric without payment of duty. 3. On the above facts, proceedings were initiated against the appellant, by way of issuance of show cause notice, which resulted in passing of an order by Additional Commissioner, confirming demand of Rs. 2,61,176/- and imposing penalty of identical amount under Rule 25(1) read with Section 11AC.  In addition, personal penalty of Rs. 20,0....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....alty of Rs. 25,000/- imposed separately under Rule 25(1) is excessive. He also challenges the confiscation of excess found goods, on the ground that the same were the production of the day of visit of officers and was yet to be entered in statutory record. 6. After hearing learned DR, I find that there is no evidence on record to show that the excess found fabric was meant for clandestine ....