2018 (7) TMI 1359

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ata. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of M.S. Ingots classifiable under Chapter 72 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. On 10.02.2009 Central Excise Officers conducted a search at the Factory and Office premises of the appellant including some other places which resulted in recovery and seizure of various documents. It has also conducted stock verification and found excess quantity of 46.257 MT of stock of finished goods and duly seized by the officers. A showcause notice dated 07.08.2009 was issued proposing to confiscate the seized goods and to impose penalty. By adjudication order dated 09.11.2010, the Adjudicating Authority confiscated 46.257 MT of e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... aside the imposition of penalties on the appellant company and its Director Shri Dinesh Adukia and uphold the confirmation of demand of Rs. 1,42,548.00 along with interest. The appellant company filed appeal No.E/76304/2016 against the said order. 5. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 6. In respect of Appeal No.E/76305/2016, the appellant filed this appeal against imposition of penalty (it should be fine) of Rs. 1,00,054/- in respect of excess stock of 46.257 MT of Ingots, in lieu of confiscation. The ld.Counsel submitted that the lower authorities confiscated the goods on the ground of charge of attempt to clandestine removal of the goods. It is submitted that there is no evidence of attempt to clandestine removal of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....015. 9. Regarding Appeal No.E/76304/2016, I find that the issue involved in this case is regarding the clearance of 65.903 M.T. of the unrecorded stock of finished goods clandestinely removed without payment of duty of Rs. 1,42,548.00. The appellant had paid the duty of Rs. 2,01,645.00 vide GAR-7 challan dated 14.04.2012. Out of which Rs. 1,42,548.00 was appropriated towards duty. It is seen from the record that the Director of the appellant company in his statement dated 31.05.2011 had accepted the non-existence of 65.903 MT of the unrecorded stock of the said goods. He stated that it is implied that the clearance of the same without payment of duty and accordingly paid the duty on 65.903 M.T. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the deman....