9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (4) TMI 277X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This appeal is against imposition of penalty of Rs. 93,214/- by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Ghaziabad under rule 57-I(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The brief facts are that the appellants imported Acetic Anhydride and cleared the same under Bill of Entry No. 11053, dated 22-9-1997 from ICD, Tuglakabad. In this B/E under the column Additional Duty two amounts viz. Rs. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Ghaziabad upheld the order passed by the original authority and rejected the appeal of the party. 3. The appellants are in appeal against the aforestated amount of penalty imposed on them. I have heard Shri S.C. Kamra, Advocate for the appellants and Shri A.K. Jain, JDR, for the respondents. The ld. Advocate has stated that though the amount of Rs. 93,214.20 was not paid under the said B/E but ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considered the submission made before me. It is provided under Sub-rule (4) of Rule 57-I - where the credit of duty paid on inputs has been taken wrongly by reason of fraud, wilful mis-statement, collusion or suppression of facts or contravention of any of provisions of the Act or the rules made thereunder with the intent to evade payment of duty, the person who is liable to pay the amount equiva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Show Cause Notice and the Order-in-Original. The appellants have also paid an amount of Rs. 2,988/- as the interest for the period, this amount was wrongfully held by them. I am, therefore, of the view that the imposition of the penalty equivalent the credit amount dis-allowed to them is not sustainable against the appellants. I am of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the case, a pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
