2004 (6) TMI 451

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppeal which has been filed against the impugned order-in-appeal, the appellants have questioned the confirmation of interest as well as penalty on them under Rule 96ZO(3) for having failed to discharge the duty under the said Rule in time. 2. The imposition of penalty of Rs. 5,000/- under the above said Rule has been contested on the ground that the Proviso III to Rule 96ZO(3) of the Rules regar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ince the appellants were working under the bona fide belief and contested their liability to pay duty under the said Rule, they could not be burdened with the interest. The learned counsel has referred to the judgment of the Tribunal in the appellants own case fixing their duty liability under Section 3-A(4) of the Act. But, in my view, this contention of the learned Counsel cannot be legally acc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X