RADO REXINE COMPANY Vs. CESTAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the assessee under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (in short, the Act') for setting aside orders passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi dated 22-3-2005, Annexure A-12 and 11-8-2006, Annexure A-15.

(2.) On 25-7-2000, the representatives of the Excise department intercepted a tempo containing coated textile fabrics without covering document. The driver made a statement that he was employee of the appellant and the goods were loaded by the appellant-firm for delivery to its sister concern. Thereafter, stock register, invoice book and other record were examined and no entry was found in respect of intercepted goods. The plea of the petitioner was that the goods were removed for the purpose of embossing of railway monogram, which was to be done at the factory of the sister concern of the assessee. The goods were seized after forming an opinion that the same were being clandestinely removed. After giving Show Cause Notice and considering the explanation of the assessee, the adjudicating authority levied duty and penalty. The goods were confiscated with option to redeem and so was the tempo.

(3.) On appeal, the appellate authority affirmed the finding and rejected the plea that the goods were being sent for job work of embossing railway monogram or that the factory of the assessee was closed. Plea of the assessee that the goods were not marketable was also rejected. It was observed that there was no covering document to cover the movement of goods. However, the appellate authority reduced the redemption fine and penalty. The Tribunal affirmed the order of the appellate authority. The appellant had earlier filed an appeal in this Court but after some hearing, the appeal was allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to move an application for rectification. Rectification application has been dismissed by the Tribunal.