9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (6) TMI 246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decided in the present appeal of the Revenue is as to whether the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in setting aside the personal penalty imposed upon the respondents under the provisions of Section 11AC by the original adjudicating authority while upholding the demand of duty against them. 2. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of Hand Pump falling under Chapter 84 of the Central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ters are independent final products being manufactured by the appellants. The said proceedings resulted in passing of the order of the original adjudicating authority confirming demand of duty against the assessee and also imposing personal penalty upon them. 4. On appeal against the above order, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that duty @ 16% adv. was leviable on the value of Pipes and Filters ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gures given in RT-12 returns and RG-23A Part-I , there cannot be any case of mala fide intention to evade duty. By observing so, the penalty was set aside. Reliance has also been made on the Tribunal s decision in the case of Tims Product Ltd. v. CCE, Calcutta-III reported in 2002 (148) E.L.T. 907 (T) = 2002 (48) RLT 855 (CEGAT - Kol.), wherein penalty was set aside on the ground that the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ainst which they have not filed any appeal. Inasmuch as there was no evidence on record to show that the respondents were indulging any short payment of duty with any mala fides, I am of the view that setting aside of the personal penalty imposed upon them by the Commissioner (Appeals) is justified. Accordingly, I reject the appeal filed by the Revenue. C.O. stands disposed of. - - TaxTMI - TMI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
