2004 (12) TMI 555

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mber (J)]. In this appeal, the Revenue has only disputed the non-imposition of penalty by the Commissioner (Appeals), through impugned order on the respondents on account of the delayed payment of duty by them. The facts are not much in dispute. During the period June, 1992 to August, 1995, the respondents collected some amount on account of charity @ 0.5% of the invoice value, which was not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... forementioned facts and circumstances, we do not find any justification in the grievance of the Revenue regarding non-imposition of penalty on the respondents. It is only after the passing of the order by the Apex Court that the respondents became liable to pay the duty amount and which was paid by them even before the adjudication. Therefore, the impugned order in appeal dropping the penalty and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X