2009 (2) TMI 604

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....4.96 M.T. and as such stock of around 10 M.T. M.S. bars valued at Rs. 1,57,325/- and involving duty of about Rs. 15,000/- was found to be in excess of the recorded balance. The excess stock was placed under seizure. Thereafter, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant for confiscation of the stock of M.S. bars found in excess of the recorded balance and also imposition of penalty on the ground that the appellant are guilty of non-accountal of the finished goods in the statutory records and accordingly contravention of the provisions of Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The Assistant Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 18-12-03 held that there is no reason for confiscation the seized goods and imposed only penalty of Rs....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd Haryana High Court judgment in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Amritsar v. Raja Impex (P.) Ltd. reported in 2008 (229) E.L.T. 185 (P&H), wherein Hon'ble High Court held that the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Weston Components Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi reported in 2000 (115) E.L.T. 278 (S.C.) would be applicable only if the goods are available for confiscation or goods has been initially release to the assessee on execution of bond. He pleaded that since in this case, the goods has been unconditionally released by Assistant Commissioner vide order-in-original, dated 18-12-03 in the subsequent the de novo adjudication, no redemption fine could be imposed. He also pleaded that the quantum of redemptio....