2004 (2) TMI 502

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Shri Vikas Kumar, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Member (J)]. Heard both the sides. 2. The appellants filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the penalty of Rs. 1 lakh was imposed on the appellants under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the m .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uced by the appellants at the time of hearing of the appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the year 2002 and the Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the certificate and allowed the benefit of notification. However, he imposed a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh. 5. The appellants are only challenging imposition of penalty on the ground that when there is no demand, therefore, imposition of penalty is not sust .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X