9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 585X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ri Samir Chitkara, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : M. Veeraiyan, Member (T)]. - These three appeals by the same assessee relate to a common issue and arise out of the same order-in-appeal No. YPP/65 to 67/SRT/2002 dated 10-1-2003. The assessee, a processor of fabrics, was working under the Compounded Levy Scheme and have made payments after the due dates in respect of some instalments. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 3,67,000/- by end of June, 99 and he paid the same after a delay of one day. The original authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 3,67,000/- which was reduced to Rs. 36,700/- by the Commissioner (Appeals). (c) In the case of Appeal No. E/975/03, the appellant was required to pay a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- by 15th of April, 99 and he paid the same after a delay of one day. The o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Parmeshwar Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India - 2005 (191) E.L.T. 86 (Guj), has held, in similar circumstances, that imposition of penalty equal to the duty outstanding is not warranted and it should be commensurate with the gain, if any, made by the party. 7. We find that there is a delay of one day in each of these cases in paying the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
