2005 (2) TMI 702

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... R, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. - This appeal has been directed against the impugned order-in-appeal dated 15-3-2004 vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the duty demand with equal amount of penalty of Rs. 33,603/- against them. 2. The duty has been confirmed against the appellants as they got themselves registered as 100% EOU under LOP for man .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... enefit of above said notification. Therefore, the duty has been rightly confirmed against them. However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, in our view, the penalty deserves to be reduced and the same is reduced to Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only). 4. Except for this modification in the penalty amount, the impugned order is upheld. The appeal stands disposed of accor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X