9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (8) TMI 444X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er : V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)]. - The Revenue has filed the present appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 592/03 dated 7-11-2003. 2. Shri O.P. Arora, learned SDR, submitted that the respondents, M/s. National Metal, manufacture hot-rolled products; that due to financial crises, they did not discharge duty liability in respect of excisable goods cleared during the months June, 2000 to August, 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of duty along with interest and penalty equal to the amount of duty outstanding from him at the end of such month; that the penalty imposed is mandatory and accordingly, the Deputy Commissioner has rightly issued the order under Sec. 142 of the Customs Act for the recovery of the duty and penalty; that the Commissioner (Appeals) has wrongly allowed the appeal filed by the respondents as they have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . M/s. National Metal, 2004 (167) E.L.T. 312 (T)] that for payment of penalty even no show cause notice was issued to the respondents before ordering detention of the goods and as such, no detention straightaway could be ordered. 4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. We observe that the respondents had not paid duty amounting to Rs. 3,90,150/- on time. The said duty, however ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t issuing the show cause notice to the assessee. The Larger Bench also in the case of Mohinder Steels Ltd. (supra), has not held that no show cause notice would be required to be issued to the assessee for demanding the duty or for imposing penalty. What has been held by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal is this that the recovery of amount is not covered by the general time-limit prescribed under S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
