2013 (6) TMI 505

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Per: B.S.V. Murthy: The facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellant unit engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods under Chapter heading 27 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During the preventive checks of appellant unit on 29.9.2006, it was noticed by the officers of Central Excise that one of their final products viz Garoil-A, B, C, D, E, F and L are manufactured from Commingled....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ad not much knowledge of the Central Excise procedure and their consultant would throw some light on the matter. It was also alleged that the appellant has never informed the department regarding the manufacturing process, classification of the resultant product and mis-classified the same with intention to evade the Central Excise duty leviable on the same goods. Samples drawn at the time of seiz....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on Shri V K Srivastava, under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Appeal filed against of order has been rejected and appellant is seeking waiver of pre-deposit and stay against recovery of the dues. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in this case the goods have been accounted for in RG-1 register and the issue of mis-classification and clearance of goods by availing wrong e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e appellant has a very strong case against the confiscation of the goods, demand for duty and imposition of penalty. 3. Heard both sides and perused the records. I find considerable force in the argument advanced by the learned counsel. Even if the goods were wrongly classified, if they have been accounted for in RG-1 register, whether they can be seized on the presumption that they would also ....