9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (1) TMI 42X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , J. 1. The instant appeal filed under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for brevity 'the Act') is directed against order dated 24.11.2010 (A-5), passed by Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, (for brevity 'the CESTAT'), rejecting the claim made by the appellant-revenue that the penalty amount imposed in the order in original dated 29.07.2004 (A-1), be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as valued at Rs. 14,51,223/-, and 2298.3 Kgs. of plastic sacks were valued at Rs. 1,10,318/-. This resulted into issuance of a show cause notice demanding a sum of Rs. 2,49,847/- as amount of duty along with interest and penalty leviable under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 (for brevity 'the Rules') read with Section 11AC of the Act. The assessee-respondent deposited a sum of Rs. 1,50,0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of duty involved on the shortage of finished goods stood paid and there was no link between shortage of finished goods found on 03.11.2001 with the shortage of inputs found on 10.05.2001. It was further held that it was a clear case of non-accounted shortage and penalty was warranted under Rule 25(1)(b) of the Rules and that there was no evidence relied upon by the Revenue justifying in invokin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paid along with admissible interest. It has come on record that the matter with regard to shortage of inputs is being separately proceeded. Accordingly, we do not find any question of law much less the substantive question of law warranting admission of the appeal. 5. Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. 6. Keeping in view the dismissal of appeal, no orders are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
