9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (11) TMI 511X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te, for the Respondent. [Order per : V.K. Agrawal Member (T)]. - Revenue has filed the present appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No. 381/04, dated 27-5-2004 by which the Commissioner (Appeals) has reduced the penalty imposed on the respondents, M/s. J.S. Khalsa Steels Ltd. from Rs. 12,50,000/- to Rs. 20,000/-. 2. Shri O.P. Arora, learned S.D.R., submitted that the respondents manufactur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of Sadashiv Castings, 2004 (165) E.L.T. 362. The learned S.D.R., further, submitted that the entire scheme of levying the Central Excise duty under Sec. 3A of the Central Excise Act, has been held to be constitutional by the Supreme Court in the case of Supreme General Steel Mills, 2001 (133) E.L.T. 513 (S.C.); that penalty equal to the amount of duty is imposable on the respondents under the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paid by them in March, 2001. He relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh v. B.H.E.L, 1998 (99) E.L.T. 33 (S.C.) wherein the Supreme Court has held that the expression shall be liable to pay penalty equal to ten times the amount of entry tax lays down only the maximum amount of penalty which could be levied and the Assessing Authority has the discretion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The contention of the Revenue is that the penalty has to be equal to the amount of duty not paid/short-paid and there is no discretion for imposing lesser amount of penalty. The learned Advocate, on the other hand, has relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of B.H.E.L. (supra) wherein the Supreme Court has interpreted a similar expression. Under the provisions of Entry Tax Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... time. The penalty is thus imposable on them but in the facts and circumstances of the case, penalty equal to the amount of duty is not imposable. The interest of justice will be met if a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- is imposed on them. We, therefore, enhance the penalty from Rs. 20,000/- to Rs. 50,000/- and dispose of the appeal in this manner. (Operative part of order pronounced in open Court on 8-1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
