2004 (6) TMI 637

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ited their premises on 28.6.01, they found an excess quantity of 2009.7 kg. of laminated rolls (finished goods) and a shortage of 7370 kgs. of PET films (inputs); that the Deputy Commissioner under Order-in-Original No. 68/2002 dated 13.1.03 demanded duty of ₹ 1,00,232 on the shortage of inputs, confiscated the finished goods found in excess with an option to redeem the same on fine of ₹ 50,000 and imposed a penalty of ₹ 1,00,232; that the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the Order-in-original and has only reduced the penalty to ₹ 50,000. He further submitted that the finished goods are not liable for confiscation as it was the production of the day, the officers had visited the factory premises and was to be ent....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the plea has been taken only subsequently and that too without substantiating it; that similarly in respect of inputs which according to them were lying on the shop floor of the factory, the same was not shown to the visiting Central Excise Officers; that this plea is also nothing but an after thought. He, therefore, contended that duty has been rightly confirmed and goods have been rightly confiscated and penalty is imposable. 4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. We do not find any force in the submissions of the learned Consultant that the finished goods found in excess was the production of the same date. On query from the Bench, the learned Consultant neither gave the time of visit of the Central Excise Officer of t....