2001 (7) TMI 602

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pondent. [Order]. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the impugned order-in-appeal dated 12-10-2000 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he had modified the order-in-original of the Assistant Commissioner by reducing the penalty from Rs. 5,20,000/- to Rs. 3.5 lakhs, imposed on them. 2. The facts are not much in dispute. The appellants were engaged in the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... impugned order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) have not been contested before me. The learned Counsel has not disputed that the appellants failed to submit monthly RT 12 Return from December 1996 to March 1997 within time and also cleared the goods during period May 1996 to April 1997 without having sufficient balance in their PLA Register. The appellants only adjusted the payment of the cl .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uction in the penalty be allowed. The learned JDR has left the matter to the Bench. 4. Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case as no mala fide intention has been attributed to the appellants and there is no material on record to suggest that the clearances made by them without having sufficient balance in the PLA were with an intention to evade duty rather the fact tha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X