9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (5) TMI 217X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the appellant is engaged in manufacture of TV Mechanical Tubes falling under Chapter 84, CETA, 1985, holding registration certificate. On the verification of the statutory records by preventive staff of Division IX, it was noticed that the appellant had removed 10,139 numbers of TV mechanical tuners under the cover of the delivery challan without payment of Central Excise duty and following Central Excise procedure such as clearance under invoice and accounting for RG 1 register. The appellant stated that the goods were received for repairs from the customer and returned after the necessary repairs, and they could not show any documents such as D-3 declaration under Rule 173H of foreign filed register showing such receipt of goods. The ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9.72 voluntarily paid towards it and imposed equal penalty of Rs. 83,340.47 under Section 11AC and demanded interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act. Appeal preferred against that order was dismissed under the impugned order under Section 35F on the ground that the appellant failed to pre-deposit the penalty of Rs. 83,340.47 within 15 days from the date of stay order dated 27-4-1998 and failed to comply within 20 days. Hence this appeal. 2. Both parties are heard. They have argued on the merits of the case. The appellant is a manufacturer of tuners a SSI unit, the production of which is within 50 lakhs and they are availing of benefit of Notification No. 175/86 and 1/93. In the instant case, they had received tuner for re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the departmental representative the question is about whether there was a clandestine removal or repair of the returned tuner to the customers who had purchased from them? The imposition of penalty and interest is challenged on the ground that the provision invoked was not available at that time. The order-in-appeal confines only about the dismissal of the appeal for non-compliance of the penalty amount of Rs. 83,340.47 as per the order dated 27-4-1998 and the compliance of the same. So from this it is clear that the Commissioner has not dealt with the case on the merits. The appeal was dismissed at a preliminary stage at 35F of Central Excise Act for non-deposit of the penalty amount. In the absence of any decision by the appellate authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
