TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 1986
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....i, Superintendent (AR) : For The Respondent ORDER Per: P.K. Jain Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a manufacturer of aluminium utensils. Aluminium utensils are exempt from payment of duty. For the manufacture of aluminium utensils, they require aluminium circles. The appellant is buying from the market aluminium circles and using the same in the manufacture of aluminium utensil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h January 2004, for confiscation of the goods seized, interest under Section 11AB and penalty on Shri Kamlesh Solanki, partner of the appellant firm, under Rule 26. The case was adjudicated wherein the said demand was confirmed. Redemption fine of Rs. 2 lakhs was imposed and a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh was imposed on Shri Kamlesh Solanki, partner. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed appea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. 6 lakhs is on a very high side. He further submitted that the second appellant is the partner in the firm and the unit is a small unit and they are not conversant with the excise procedures and as soon as the departmental people pointed out their mistake in 2004, they paid the estimated duty and, therefore, requested for lenient view. 3. Learned AR, on the other hand, took us through the impug....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....doubtedly satisfying those conditions. It is not under dispute that the appellant themselves were purchasing such aluminium circles from the market. This itself shows that the goods are marketable. We, therefore, do not find any strength in the submissions of the appellant that the goods produced are not marketable. Under the circumstances, we do not find any strength in the appeals filed by the a....