2004 (12) TMI 606

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... espondent. [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. -In these appeals, the Revenue has questioned the correctness of the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) to the extent of setting aside the penalties in toto imposed by the adjudicating authority on the respondents for delayed payment of duty under Rule 96ZO. 2.The learned SDR has contended that imposition of penalties being mand .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appeal S No. 283-284, dated 8-4-2003 but in those cases, the Tribunal, even imposed penalties on the assessee, as we find from the facts recorded in the grounds of appeal of the Revenue. Apart from this, in our view, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the penalties against the respondents is not legally maintainable. The provisions of Rule 96ZO are mandatory and in a case of def .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X