2002 (2) TMI 224

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....voice refers to debit entry in RG 23A Part II, the same was not effected in the statutory register. It would appear the person in-charge of the same Mr. K.A.K.V. Rao was on sick leave on the concerned day. It transpires that he has intimated the same to the office. The fact remains that the relevant statutory records were not properly completed regarding clearance of the goods represented by invoice Nos. 2025 to 2040, 2041, 2042 to 2046, dated 26-3-1999. On intelligence of the department, goods were inspected and seized. The proceedings were initiated and the assessee as well as the other appellants were charged with violation of Rule 173Q, Section 11AC and 209A. After hearing the parties and considering the replies, the Commissioner of Cen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....that the imposition of penalty on Tarun Jain, who is the director of the assessee company at Mumbai can never be imposed because he was not at the place of occurrence at that time. As far as the imposition of penalty on the truck owners and drivers are concerned, they do not have knowledge or reason to believe that the goods were that they were transporting were liable to confiscation in terms as provided under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules. Consequently confiscation of the truck which carried the goods cannot be sustained and will be set aside. 4. Ld. DR adopts the reasoning in the impugned order. 5. We have considered the circumstances. When we look into the facts of the case, it is clear that if the assessee was interested ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on to know that the goods which they were transported have contravened the provisions of Central Excise Rules. 7. We now turn to the penalty imposed on the manufacturer. Its contention was that there was no intent to evade payment of duty. The liability to imposition of penalty is not disputed but extenuating to circumstances warrant leniency are advanced. In our opinion, these circumstances exists in this case. The fact that K.A.K.V. Rao, officer excise took leave on ground of illness is established by his application. The company therefore had to make use of the service of someone else to attend to the function that he performs relating to making entry in the Personal Ledger Account and Modvat account. It is therefore possible that the....