FARMPARTS COMPANY Vs. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. & S.T.
LAWS(CE)-2015-2-67
CUSTOMS EXCISE AND GOLD(CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on February 05,2015

Appellant
VERSUS
Respondents

JUDGEMENT

ASHOK JINDAL, J. - (1.)THE appellant is in appeal against the impugned order. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Tractor Parts, Forging, etc. Acting upon information, the Preventive Staff of the Central Excise visited the factory premises of the appellant on 30 -11 -2009.
(2.)The concerned Range Staff was already there supervising the stuffing of export consignment in the container. The Preventive Staff did physical verification of the stock who found that the goods were 52 pallets and 85 cardboard cartons (duly packed containing Tractor parts and forgings, etc.) valued at Rs. 40,39,532/ - involving Central Excise duty of Rs. 3,32,857/ - were found lying unaccounted in the factory premises of the appellant against the recorded balance in their statutory record, i.e., RG -1 register. It was noticed that there were predated 'OK stickers' pasted on the pallets/boxes with the dates prior to the date of visit of staff and also bearing the details like part number of the goods contained therein. The goods were found in fully finished and in packed condition. The goods were seized and a case was booked against the appellant for confiscation of seized goods. The show cause notice issued and adjudication took place and it was held that the goods were liable for confiscation and the same can be redeemed on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 5 lakh and for imposition of penalty of equivalent amount. Aggrieved with the said order, the appellant filed the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the adjudication order. Therefore, the appellant is before me.
Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that although the goods were lying unaccounted in the factory premises but merely on non -accountal of the goods in the statutory records, the goods cannot be confiscated without mala fide intent to clear the goods. Therefore, he submits that the goods were not liable for confiscation and consequently redemption fine and penalty be dropped.

(3.)ON the other hand, learned AR for the Revenue submits that the goods were in packed condition and were about to be removed clandestinely without payment of duty. Therefore, the goods were liable for confiscation, imposition of redemption fine and penalty.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.