2008 (5) TMI 554

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er (Appeals) ordered that the value on which differential duty of Rs. 2,21,220/- was demanded to be treated as inclusive of duty. The original authority had demanded a differential duty of Rs. 2,21,220/- payable on cotton woven/processed fabrics. Denying the exemption availed by the appellants for the clearances of the impugned goods under Notification No. 38/03, dated 30-4-2003 during the periods .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... esent case on account of interpretation of Notification on its eligibility to the appellants. No intentional violation had been established in this case warranting imposition of penalty equal to the duty and penalty. ld. SDR reiterates the findings contained in the orders of the lower authorities. He submits that the reduced penalty is justified. The penalty deserved to be sustained. 3. After s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ation; but not, in cases where there is a technical or venial breach of the provisions of the Act or where the breach flows from a bona fide belief that the offender is not liable to act in the manner prescribed by the statute. In view of the above ratio, the penalty imposed is vacated and the appeal allowed in part. (Dictated and pronounced in open Court) - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Central Ex .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X