(1.) THE appeal is directed against Order -in -Appeal No. AT/46/M -II/2004, dated 28 -7 -2004 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai. Vide the impugned order, the learned appellate authority has upheld the duty demand of Rs. 3,11,776/ - along with interest thereon and also imposition of equivalent amount of penalty vide order dated 29 -1 -2003 passed by the adjudicating authority. Aggrieved of the same, the appellant is before us.
(2.) THE case against the appellant is that they manufactured and cleared samples of fragrances without payment of duty during 1997 -98 to 2001 -02 and without maintaining proper records. It is also alleged that they manufactured and cleared the soap noodles containing these fragrances as samples to potential customers.
(3.) THE learned Additional Commissioner (AR) appearing for the Revenue on the other hand reiterates the findings of the lower authorities and submits that inasmuch as the appellant had not maintained any records nor informed the department about the clearance of the goods, the impugned order is sustainable. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides.