2007 (3) TMI 25

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r (Appeals) imposing redemption fine of Rs. 10,000/-, duty liability of Rs. 34,560/- and penalty of the same amount as well as interest on the findings that there was clandestine manufacture and clearance of 24,000 bottles of packaged drinking water. The ld. Counsel appearing for the appellant argued that when the adjudication order made the appellants' charge free, Revenue's appeal against that o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l supported order of adjudication. He urged that although goods were found excess, those were not liable to seizure when such goods were inside the factory and there was no occasion of movement thereof without following due procedural of Excise Law and those goods have suffered duty on removal in due course. 2. Ld. DR for the Revenue supported order of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) and prayed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed the decisions of the Tribunal in the cases (i) Kartar Steels (Pot.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh reported in 1997 (93) E.L.T. 443 (Tribunal), (ii) Polyglass Acrylic Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi II reported in 2002 (150) E.L.T. 466 (Tri. - Del.), (iii) Bhillai Conductors (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Raipur reported in 2000 (125) E.L.T. 781 (Tribunal), ....