2002 (7) TMI 196

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ants against the common Order dated 17-8-2000 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Jaipur. Since the issue in both the appeals is the same, they are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Shri D.N. Mehta, learned Advocate has appeared on behalf of the appellants and submitted that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of chewing tobacco falling under Chapter Headi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....4 register showed a balance of 3724 Kgs as on 1.12.97 whereas the actual on physical verification was found to be 1592 Kgs. He drew my attention to para 6 of the Order-in-Original wherein Shri Anand Prakash Arora, Proprietor of M/s. Arora Products in his voluntary statement tendered under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, on 18-2-97 admitted that the goods which were accounted after thei....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the stock of rava and moti patti lying in the appellant's factory while deciding the matter rather than dismissing this plea out of hand; that the lower authorities ought to have taken the extenuating circumstances of the case in deciding the matter and accordingly refrained from taking a harsh view of the matter by not only demanding duty without taking due note of the explanation regarding the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....reported in 2000 (121) E.L.T. page 81 and another case reported in 2000 (117) E.L.T. 644; he contended that the sole proprietary firm and its proprietor cannot be treated as different entity and as such it would not be legally permissible to impose penalty both on the firm and on the sole proprietor; that in order to prove clandestine removal, positive proof is required as held in Kothari Products....