Per P.G. Chacko : The appellants are aggrieved by the orders of the authorities below confirming a demand of duty of Rs. 2,10,549.80 against them under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules 1944 read with Section 11A of the Central Excise Act and imposing on them a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh under Rule 173Q.

2. Examined the records and heard both sides. The department's case against the appellants is based on certain private records which were resumed by officers of Central Excise from their factory on 31.8.91. According to the department, the difference between the quantities of production shown in the private record (Daily Production Report) and the RG-1 register for the period 1.4.90 to 30.8.91 was clandestine production carried out with intent for clandestine removal. Therefore, by show cause notice dated 27.3.95 invoking the extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11A (1) of the Act, the department demanded duty on a quantity of over 1 lakh pieces of Fluorescent Tube Lights (FTL) which was found to be the difference in quantity between the private record and the statutory register. They also proposed to impose penalty on the party. The proposals were conteste