9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 232X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts reduction is only subject to the condition prescribed in 1st and 2nd proviso of section 11AC - Since the penalty had been imposed under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules where the quantum is discretionary, there is no informity in the impugned order reducing the penalty and as such the conditions for reduced penalty in 1st and 2nd proviso to section 11AC are not applicable to this case - The revenue s appeal is dismissed. - 2999 of 2009 (SM) - - - Dated:- 5-5-2011 - Shri Rakesh Kumar, J. Shri R.S.Sharma, Advocate for the respondent. Shri Anil Khanna, SDR for the appellant. Per. Rakesh Kumar :- The respondent are manufacturer of electrical contacts chargeable to Central Excise duty. A show cause notice dated 29.08 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s order reducing the penalty to 25% of the duty amount under section 11AC read with Rule 25, on the ground that since the interest on duty had not been paid within the period stipulated in proviso to section 11AC, the reduction of penalty is not correct. The respondent in respect of appeal by the department has filed the Cross Objection. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. Shri Anil Khanna, Ld. SDR, assailed the impugned order reducing the penalty on the respondent by reiterating the grounds of appeal. He also relied upon the Board s Circular dated 15.09.09 according to which the benefit of reduced penalty in terms of proviso to Section 11AC can be given only on fulfillment of following three conditions : (i) The duty demand confirmed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned order. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions from both the sides and have perused the records. 6. On going through the show cause notice, it is seen that the Assistant Commissioner proposed imposition of penalty only under Rule 25 and there is no mention at all of imposition of penalty under section 11AC. The Assistant Commissioner in the adjudication order has imposed penalty under Rule 25 only, not under section 11AC and under Rule 25, the quantum of penalty is discretionary. The Commissioner (Appeals) in his order cannot go beyond the scope of the show cause notice and impose penalty under section 11AC. Just because the Commissioner (Appeals) refers to section 11AC also, the penalty imposed by the original adjud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
