2004 (4) TMI 510

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Heard Shri P.K. Ghosh, Consultant for Appellant and Shri N.K. Mishra, JDR for Respondent. In present appeal, the learned Consultant has challenged the quantum of penalty. Therefore, I waive the condition of pre-deposit and heard the appeal on merit. 2. Learned Consultant submits that they supplied material in accordance with the Certificate issued by West Bengal Electricity Board duly counte .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ediately corrected the mistake by adjustment in RG 23A Part-II. Therefore, he submits that the penalty imposed on petitioner may be set aside. Alternatively, learned Consultant submits that the 100% penalty is not imposable. He relied on the following decisions : (i) Surelia Engg. Works v. Commissioner of Customs Central Excise, Ahmedabad, reported in 2002 (144) E.L.T. 208 (Tri.- Mumbai) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... In present case the material was supplied on the basis of certificate issued by Secretary, Department of Power, West Bengal and it was endorsed by Supdt. of Excise (Technical), Kolkata. The petitioner was under bona fide believe that they are entitled to the exemption under notification. When it was pointed out that the exemption was not available to them, then the credit was adjusted in RG 23A Pa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X