9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 1133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R, for the Respondent. [Order per : G.R. Sharma, Member (T)]. M/s. New Allenberry Works have filed this appeal challenging the order of the ld. Commissioner of Central Excise confirming demand of Rs. 1,57,200.30 and imposing penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/-. 2. The facts of the case briefly stated are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of gear boxes. They cleared 161 consignme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. Therefore, there was no question of confirmation of demand. The ld. Counsel submitted that in view of the above submissions, the penalty imposed on the appellants was out of all proportion and harsh. They submitted that there was no intention to evade payment of duty and that on the date of actual clearance of goods, there was sufficient balance in the PLA and hence there was no question of any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly been confirmed. 5. Regarding imposition of penalty, ld. DR submits that the penalty has been imposed for contravention of the Rules. He submits that according to the duty paying documents, the position is amply clear that the goods have been cleared when there was not sufficient balance in the PLA. He, therefore, submits that looking to the facts of the case, penalty is reasonable. 6. We ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
