2013 (8) TMI 351

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....anufacturing process is also re-used within the factory. During the period from 8/8/08 to 18/8/08 stock taking of the finished products and inputs was done by the jurisdictional Central Excise officers. During stock taking there was excess of 0.592 M.T. in respect of the stock of aluminium ingots (finished products), excess of 11.554 M.T. in the stock of aluminium scrap (raw material) and also excess of 5.325 M.T. in the stock of aluminium dross and ash and residue. There was no shortage or excess in respect of any other finished product or input. After issue of show cause notice, the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 26/2/10 ordered confiscation of the excess stock with option to be redeemed on payment of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is, the impugned order upholding the confiscation of the goods and imposition of penalty is not sustainable. He also pleaded that there is a totally justification for imposition of penalty on Shri Rishab Jain, Director of the appellant company as there is nothing prove that he has dealt with any excisable goods knowing that the same liable for confiscation. 4. Shri Sanjay Jain, the learned Departmental Representative, defended the impugned order by reiterating the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) and emphasised that the stock taking was an elaborate process done over a period of 10 days, that the excess are the actual excess as the same are not only in respect of input (aluminium scrap), but also in respect of their final product (al....