TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1995 (9) TMI 377
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Respondents. ORDER In April, 1978, the Assistant Collector of Central Excise visited the premises of the appellants herein and drew representative samples of goods purchased by the appellants from M/s. Swadeshi Polytex Ltd. under cover of Gate pass No. 0289, dated 21-10-1973. On chemical examination, the goods were found to contain characteristics of polyester tow and could not be considered as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llegation regarding any connivance with M/s. Swadeshi Polytex, no duty could be demanded from the appellants. The Adjudicating Authority ordered confiscation of 1789 kgs. of polyester tow with an option to the appellants to reedeem the same on payment of a fine of ₹ 40,000/-. However, no duty was demanded on this quantity as duty demand had already been confirmed against M/s. Swadeshi Polyte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s who use the same in the manufacture of shoddy wool and in the face of the admitted position that this quantity was purchased from M/s. Swadeshi Polytex, duty can be demanded only from the manufacturer viz. M/s. Swadeshi Polytex and not from the appellants herein. On the penalty aspect, he submits that since the show cause notice does not seek to initiate any penal action, the penalty is not sust....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... penalty. Lastly he contends that the seized goods having been found to be polyester fibre tow confiscation has been rightly ordered and the redemption fine has been rightly imposed. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions of both sides. There is no dispute as to the nature of the goods viz. that they are polyester fibre tow as borne out by the report of the Chemical Examiner and hen....