9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (5) TMI 545X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appeal No. E/523/03 by M/s. Geeta Prints Ltd. and the Departmental Appeal No. E/677/03 are against the same order of Commissioner (Appeals). 1.3 Appeal No. E/586/03 by M/s. Bindal Silk Mills and the Departmental appeal No. E/673/03 are against the same order of Commissioner (Appeals). 1.4 Appeal No. E/560/03 by M/s. Ashoka Dyg. Ptg. Mill, Appeal No. E/616/03 by M/s. Balaji Processors and Appeal No. E/1016/03 by M/s. Sona Industries, are parties appeals against the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals). 1.5 Appeal Nos. E/670/03, E/672/03, E/674/03, E/675/03, E/676/03 are appeals filed by the Department against the order of Commissioner (Appeals). 2. In all these appeals, issue involved is common and therefore they are being dealt w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In the case of M/s. Geetha Prints Ltd., the original authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,25,000/- for delayed payment relating to June, 2000, which was reduced to Rs. 2,63,000/-. (e) In the case of M/s. Balaji Processors Pvt. Ltd., there was a delay of 5 days for payment of duty for the month of Sep., 2000 and the original authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 3,00,000/- which was reduced to Rs. 60,000/- by Commissioner (Appeals). (f) In the case of M/s. Zenith Processing Mills, the original authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,07,000/- for the months of Jan. to June, 1999, which was reduced to Rs. 1,03,500/- by Commissioner (Appeals). (g) In the case of M/s. Utsav Silk Mills, the original authority imposed a penalty of R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... days 1st and 2nd October were holidays, the assessee has paid duty due on 3-10-2000. In similar situation, we held the payment has been made on due date and hence the appeal of this assessee is to be allowed. 6.2 In respect of cases in other appeals, delay in payment of duty due is admitted. But it is noticed that there was no intention in these cases to evade any duty and the delay was basically due to financial constraints faced by the assessees. Hon ble High Court of Gujarat, has held in case of M/s. Parameshwar Dyeing Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI - 2005 (191) E.L.T. 86 (Guj.) , that penalty in such cases should be commensurate with the gain, if any, made by the party. We also notice that the minimum of penalty envisaged under Ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
