9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 985X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter stands remanded by the Hon ble High Court of Gujarat for fresh decision on the quantum of penalty, in the light of the Hon ble Supreme Court s judgment in the case of Union of India v. Dharamendra Textile Processors reported in 2008 (231) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) accordingly, I have heard learned SDR. Nobody appeared on behalf of the appellant. 2. As per facts on record the Original Adjudicating Auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 20,000/-. The said order of the Tribunal was put to challenge before the Hon ble High Court and stands remanded. 4. I find that the law stands declared by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the above referred judgment in the case of M/s. Dharamendra Textile Processors laying down that where the provisions of Section 11AC are invoked, authorities have no discretion to impose less penalty. In view o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... if the amount is deposited within a period of thirty days of the communication of the said order. 6. The said Provisos were the subject matter of consideration of their own lordships of Punjab Haryana Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Rohtan v. JR Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2009 (238) E.L.T. 209 (P H) After taking note of the Hon ble Supreme Court s judgment in the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
