TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (12) TMI 144
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lved is whether the goods lying in the factory premises are liable for confiscation under the provisions of Central Excise Act and Rules made thereunder. 2. When the matter was called no one was present on behalf of the Respondents, M/s. Universal Auto Products Ltd., inspite of notice. It is also observed that Respondents has not appeared in the past whenever the appeal was posted for hearing. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ner (Appeals), however, under the impugned Order set aside the confiscation holding that seizure was not warranted as the goods were lying in the factory premises. The Commissioner (Appeals) relied upon the decisions in the case of Southern Steel Ltd. v. UOI - 1979 (4) E.L.T. J402 (A.P.) : Pooja Forge Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE - 1996 (84) E.L.T. 37 (T) and Western Transformer & Equipment Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Respondents for not entering the production daily in RG-I Register. Rules 173Q and 226 of the Central Excise Rules provide for confiscation of the excisable good if a manufacturer does not account for any excisable goods manufactured by him and if he fails to enter the required particulars in the Register. The Ld. DR has relied upon the decision in the case of Hindustan General Industries Ltd. v.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....goods if a manufacturer "does not account for any excisable goods manufactured, produced or stored by him" was not in consideration in that case. Similar is the case of Pooja Forge. The contention of the appellants therein was that the goods were lying in the finishing room and they had not reached RG-I stage, as they were required to be weighed, sorted out and packed in gunny bags. In the present....