9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (6) TMI 546X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R, for the Respondent. [Order per : V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)]. M/s. Bronze Powder (P) Ltd. are challenging by this appeal imposition of penalty on them. 2. Shri V.R. Sethi, learned Advocate, submitted that the appellants process cotton and manmade fabrics which attract duty on the basis of annual capacity of production under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act; that prior to 1-3-2000, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame on 11-1-2001 and 23rd February, 2001. Ld. Advocate, further mentioned that the amount of duty payable by them was finally determined only on 27-2-2001; that however, the Assistant Commissioner under Order-in-Original No. 100/2001, dated 28-9-2001 has imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- only which on appeal filed by the Revenue has been enhanced by the Commissioner (Appeals) to Rs. 15 lakhs; that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2003 (156) E.L.T. 596 (T) = 2003 (59) RLT 583 (CESTAT-Mum)] wherein it has been held that the independent textile processors is not to be penalized for non-payment of duty for the month of April, 2000 as the annual production capacity was determined by the Commissioner only on 16-1-2001. 3. Countering the arguments, Ms. Charul Barnwal, Learned Senior Departmental Representative, submitted that i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can not be regarded as a voluntary act as they have already contravened the provisions by not discharging the appropriate duty liability. 4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. It has not been disputed by the Revenue that the appellants had filed a declaration in April, 2000 for determination of their annual capacity of production. It has also not been disputed by Revenue that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the amount of duty payable under sub-rule (1) shall be debited by the independent processor in the account currency maintained by him under sub-rule (1) of Rule 173G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. It is thus apparent that the liability to pay duty under sub-rule (2) arises after the determination of duty under sub-rule (1). As observed by us earlier the duty under sub-rule (1) of Rule 96 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
