9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (3) TMI 232X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Member (T)]. This is an appeal directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 28/Collector/91 dated 8-12-1991 passed by the Collector of Central Excise Customs, Ahmedabad imposing a penalty of Rs. 2.00 lacs on the appellants. 2. The facts of the case are that on receipt of certain information, the officers of Central Excise carried out a check in the appellants factory producing TV sets. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w that equal number of sets have been received under Rule 173H which were subsequently cleared without payment of duty and hence, no duty demand could be sustainable. However, he imposed a penalty of Rs. 2.00 lacs under Rule 173Q for contravention of Rule 173H as discussed above. The present appeal is against the aforesaid order. 3. Both at the time of hearing of stay application as well as duri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... could be invoked where a manufacturer contravenes any of the provisions of the rules with an intent to evade payment of duty . 4. After hearing both the sides, we find that when the admitted position is that there is no duty evasion in this case and the duty demand has been dropped by the Collector, Rule 173Q would not be available for imposition of penalty. If there had been a contravention of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
