2005 (9) TMI 469

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ndent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. Both these appeals arise from OIA Nos. 55 56/2003 dated 25-6-2003 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Bangalore who has reduced the duty amount to Rs. 86,490/- and also modified the penalty to this amount only in terms of Section 11AC of the CE Act. The penalty of Rs. 10,000/- on the partner of the appellant-firm has been confirmed. The f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h is not sustainable in law. He refers to the judgment of the Tribunal rendered in the case of Parry Co. Ltd. v. CCE, Trichy - 2002 (149) E.L.T. 1055 (Tri. - Chennai) which has clearly held that the 5 years period has to be only from the relevant date under proviso to Section 11A(1), clause (c), of C.E. Act. It is his submission that the duty would be only Rs. 20,000/- if this Clause is applied. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed themselves as manufacturers nor they had been following the procedures. Therefore, in terms of the judgment rendered in the case of Parry Co. Ltd. (supra), the 5 years period should be computed in terms of Section 11A(1), Clause (c) and not for a period beyond 5 years. The duty is to be computed from the date of service of Show Cause Notice which is 10-8-2001. The duty beyond 5 years from thi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X