2017 (12) TMI 492

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra Heard both the sides. 2. These appeals are filed against order-in-appeal No.VAP-EXCUS-000-APP-83-84-14-15 passed by the Central Excise Commissioner (Appeals) Vapi. 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the appellant are engaged in the manufacture of Aluminum Conductors falling under Chapter 76 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During the course of s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o in turn, rejected their appeals. Hence, the present appeals. 3. The Ld. Chartered Accountant Shri Vipul Khandhar, for the appellant submitted that explaining the excess stock of 81,250/- Kgs of Aluminum Scrap, General Manager Sh. K.G. Unnikrishnan of the Appellant in his statement recorded on 30.04.2013, stated that even though the scrap which generated on day to day basis, and not entered in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ager is bad in law and cannot be sustained. 5. Ld. AR for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals). 6. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 7. I find that the short issue involved in the present case is whether excess aluminum scrap of 81,250 Kgs found in the factory premises of the appellant on 24.12.2012 is liable for confiscation and consequently un....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Central Excise Rules, 2002 it is clear that the goods are liable for confiscation in the event the same are not accounted for in their books of accounts. In the present case though it is not mentioned in their Daily Stock Account (DSA) register RG-1 but the same are duly accounted for in their internal production/process register. In these circumstances, in my opinion, confiscation of the good....