Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
M/S. Nestle India Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Goa on 23 January, 2001
Equivalent citations: 2001(137)ELT1289(TRI-DEL)
ORDER S.S.Kang, Member, J.
1. The appellant filed this appeal against the order in original passed by the Commissioner of Cental Excise.
2. In this case certain goods were found unaccounted in the RG-I record. A show cause notice was issued to the appellant for confiscation of the goods and for imposing penalty under the provisions of Rule 173Q and 226 of the Central Excise Rules.
3. Heard both sides.
4. The contention of the appellant is that goods were found in the factory which were not entered in their RG-I Register, Therefore, the goods were not liable for confiscation in view of the decision of the tribunal in the case of Bhillai Conductors (P) Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Raipur, reported in 2000 (91) ECR 569 (Tribunal). The contention of the appellant is that were only liable to a penalty of Rs.2,000/- under the Rule 226 of Cental Excise Rules.
5. The contention of the Revenue is that appellant had not accounted the goods in their RG-I Register. Therefore, the goods were liable to confiscation as per the provisions or Rule 173Q (i)(b). The Revenue further contended that the provisions of Rule 173Q of Cental Excise Rules are mandatory in nature and the manufacturer has to follow the procedure laid down under the Central Excise Rules for accounting the goods in their RG-I account.
6. In the case of Bhillai Conductros (P) Ltd. (Supra), after considering the earlier view held that in absence of any mens rea, the goods found unaccounted in the factory cannot be confiscated nor any penalty can be impose under Central Excise Rules 173Q. Only penalty under Rule 226 of Central Excise Rules is imposed. In the present case, the Commissioner of Central Excise in Para-16, 17 and 18 gave a specific finding that the appellant had no intention to evade the Central Excise duty. Revenue had not challenged this finding. Therefore, the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Bhillai Conductors (P) Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Raipur, reported in 2000 (91) ECR 569 (Tribunal ) is applicable in the present case. Resectfully following the ratio of the above decision, the confiscation of the goods in question and penalty imposed under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules is set aside. The appellants are liable to any a penalty of rs.2,000/- under Rule 226 of Central Excise Rules. The appeal is disposed of as indicated above.