9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 83X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e penalty reduced to 25% of the duty amount - in the absence of option being given by the lower authorities, the option had been granted to pay the duty amount, interest and the reduced penalty - 2154 of 2009-SM(BR) - - - Dated:- 25-1-2011 - Mr. M. Veeraiyan, J. Shri Naveen Bindal, Advocate for the Appellants Shri Anil Khanna, SDR for the Respondent Per M. Veeraiyan: Heard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... na High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Rohtak vs. J.R. Fabrics (P) Ltd. reported in 2009 (238) ELT 209 (P H). 4. Learned SDR submits that the appellants have not paid the duty before issue of show cause notice. They have also not paid the interest. 5. In the rejoinder, learned advocate submits that they have already paid the entire penalty on 2.6.2009 and excess amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y considered by us and we are of the view that they are not applicable to the facts of the present case. The Tribunal while dismissing the Departmental Appeal observed that the quantum of the penalty is to the extent at around 25% of the duty amount and does not call for any interference. The Tribunal is taking consistent view in the matters of penalty levied under Section 11AC and when the duty a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
