2005 (6) TMI 449 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Duty liability under the Compounded Levy Scheme.
2. Re-determination of assessable value leading to a duty demand.
3. Imposition of penalty under Rule 96ZP (3).
4. Appeal against the order-in-appeal affirming the duty demand and penalty.
5. Reduction of penalty due to duty payment.

The judgment pertains to an appeal against an order-in-appeal upholding the duty demand and penalty imposed on the appellants under the Compounded Levy Scheme for manufacturing hot re-rolled non-alloy steel products. The officers, upon verifying the parameter 'd' during a factory visit, re-determined the assessable value, leading to a show-cause notice for payment of a differential duty and penalty. The adjudicating authority confirmed a duty demand of Rs. 51,096/- along with an equal penalty amount. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld this order.

The counsel for the appellants did not contest the duty liability but requested the penalty to be set aside since the duty had already been paid. However, the imposition of penalty under the proviso to Rule 96ZP (3) was deemed mandatory. Despite this, considering the circumstances and the full payment of duty by the appellants, the penalty was reduced to Rs. 5000/-.

Consequently, the impugned order was modified, and the appeal of the appellants was disposed of with the reduced penalty amount. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in open court on 24-6-2005 by Shri P.S. Bajaj, J.

---