9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (11) TMI 227X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty imposed. See Union of India Vs. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills (2009 - TMI - 33419 - Supreme Court Of India) - Decided in favor of Revenue. - E/3821/2003-Mum. - - - Dated:- 4-11-2011 - Mr. Sahab Singh, J. Appearance: Shri A.K. Prabhakar, Superintendent (A.R.) for appellant This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order-in-appeal No.BPS(251)517/2003 dated 22.8.2003. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent in appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order upheld the order-in-original except the reduction in penalty for Rs.81,012/- to Rs.10,000/-. The Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order on the ground of reduction in penalty only. 3. The learned authorized representative for the Revenue submits that in this case the penalty was imposed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise act. The issue stands settled in view of the Supreme Court judgment (supra) in the case of Union of India Vs. Rajasthan Spinning Weaving Mills therein, wherein it was held that penalty under Section 11AC is mandatory penalty which is equal to Central Excise duty involved in the case. I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has no powers to reduce th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
