Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2015 (1) TMI 1039

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cted in the factory premises of the assessee. During the course of search, it was found that there was shortage of certain raw materials and the MS ingot is in excess as per the records maintained by them. Thereafter a panchnama was drawn regarding the shortage of raw material and excess of finished goods. After investigation, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee for violation of Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 to render the goods liable for confiscation and consequently for imposition of penalty. Show cause notice was adjudicated. The adjudicating authority confirmed the confiscation of raw materials and finished goods, consequently imposed redemption fine of Rs. 13,80,000/- and penalty of Rs. 6,74,953/-. The said order....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... against the assessee. Therefore, impugned order holding the goods liable for confiscation and consequential imposition of penalty on the assessee is not sustainable as held by this Tribunal in the case of CCE, Lucknow vs. BMW Steels Ltd. as reported in [ 2011 (272) ELT 315 (Tri-Del)]; L M Steels P Ltd. vs. CCE, Ghaziabad [2011 (264) ELT 243 (Tri- Del)] ; CCE, Ludhiana vs. B K Coated Board Ltd. [2011 (273) ELT 560 (Tri-Del)]; and CCE Meerut I vs. Silvertone Papers Ltd. [2013 (287) ELT 478 (Tri- Del)]. She also relied upon the decision of CCE Hyderabad vs. Mahalakshmi Profiles Ltd. [2012 (279) ELT 355 (AP)]. 5. On the other hand, learned AR opposed the contention of the learned Counsel and submits that in fact during the course of search,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... under these rules, or (b) does not account for any excisable goods produced or manufactured or stored by him; or (c) engages in the manufacture, production or storage of any excisable goods without having applied for the registration certificate required under section 6 of the Act; or (d) Contravenes any of the provisions of these rules or the notifications issued under these rules with intent to evade payment of duty. Then, all such goods shall be liable to confiscating and the producer or manufacturer or registered person of the warehouse or a registered dealer, as the case may be, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding the duty on the excisable goods in respect of which any contravention of the nature referred to in clau....