2017 (10) TMI 546

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....unts it was noticed that stock of molasses was in excess. The said excess quantity was arrived by at officers by adopting Dip Reading method of all the stock of the molasses in the storage tank. Since there was an excess stock the same was seized and provisionally released by the authorities as daily stock of the molasses was recorded as 1401.495 MT. A show cause notice was issued to the appellant for the confiscation of the excess stock found and also for imposing penalty. The adjudicating authority after following due process of law, confiscated the excess goods and allowed to be redeemed on payment of redemption fine and also imposed a penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rule, 2002. Aggrieved by such an order, an appeal preferred....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s. 5. Considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. It is undisputed that the excess quantity of molasses as arrived by the Departmental Officers during the visit to the factory premises of appellant was based upon the Dip Reading method conducted. It is also on record, the appellant had contested with the adjudicating authority as well as the First Appellate Authority that method of arrived at the stock by adopting Dip Reading method is wrong and correct picture may not arise. 6. I find that both the lower authorities have summarily dismissed the challenges made by appellant as to the method adopted for arriving of stock of molasses by Dip Reading method. I do find strong force in submissions that the stock o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and there is no physical excess of the goods and they are not accepting the same and also not recording the excess quantity in RG-1 register. The Adjudicating authority disregarding the contentions of the appellant, confiscated the excess goods, also imposed penalty on the appellant. On an appeal the Commissioner (Appeals), though accepted that there may be excess stock of molasses but has considered the same as small quantity and gave benefit to the appellant up to 15% as tenable and reduced the redemption fine and penalty. Hence this appeal. 3.Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that on 22-10-2001 when stock was verified by dip method they did not accept this stock due to inherent foaming nature of the goods. It is hi....