TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 594X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nge in the present appeal is against the personal penalty of Rs. 27,000/- imposed upon the appellant in terms of provisions of Rule 173Q. 2. After hearing both sides, I find that the said penalty stands imposed on the allegation that the appellant, while sending input to their job workers has debated amount of duty equivalent to 10% of the duty instead of 10% of value of the input. Accordingly, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndue benefit to the appellant and as such imposition of penalty is unjust and unjustified. On being asked, he clarified that this has happened only once and there is no such practice being followed by them. 4. In view the above, I find no justification for imposition of penalty, especially when the entire exercise being Revenue neutral and the demand having been held as unsustainable against the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|