2004 (2) TMI 476

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... onsultant, for the Respondent. [Order]. This is a Revenue appeal directed against the order-in-appeal whereunder the respondents appeal against the order-in-original was allowed. In the order-in-original, duty of Rs. 55,370/- was confirmed against the respondents along with imposition of penalty of equivalent amount. Besides, a penalty of Rs. 30,000/- was also imposed on the company and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n intent to evade payment of Central Excise duty. 3. Heard both sides. 4. The dispute relates to liability to duty in respect of replacement of damaged goods with the goods manufactured by the respondents by using bought out items, and clearance of such replacement goods without following the Central Excise procedures. The duty demand of Rs. 55,370/- has been paid before the issue of show caus .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... posed on the respondents by the original authority are excessive. Accordingly, these are reduced as under :- Penalty imposed under Section 11AC is reduced to Rs. 10,000/- and consequently penalty imposed under other rules is set aside. 5. Since a single appeal has been filed, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in respect of the Managing Director of the respondents company becomes final. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X