9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 735X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n this appeal, appeal is dismissed - Tax Appeal No. 2585 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 4-5-2011 - Akil Kureshi, Sonia Gokani, JJ. R.J. Oza for the Appellant JUDGEMENT Sonia Gokani: 1. The revenue has proposed the following questions of law, challenging the decision of CESTAT dated 11.6.2010: (a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has committed substantial error of law in extending benefit of reduced penalty under section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962 subject to the respondent depositing 25% of the penalty along with the balance amount of demand and interest within period of 30 days from passing of the impugned order by the Tribunal? (b) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r (Appeals) which upheld the Order-in-Original by deciding the issue against the assessee -respondent. However, the penalty on the partner of the Unit had been deleted. 5. Assessee-respondent challenged the amount of penalty. However, it did not contest the demand of duty and interest in respect of shortfall of imported PFY. The Tribunal vide its order dated 11th June, 2010, confirmed the demand of duty, interest and reduced amount of penalty. The impugned order was challenged, raising the aforementioned questions of law. 6. On hearing, learned counsel Mr. R.J.Oza appearing for the Department who fairly submitted that though other issues have been raised, he essentially insists on determination of Question No.1 relating to the reduc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t has been erroneously refunde d by reason of collusion or any willful mis-statement or suppression of facts, the person who is liable to pay the duty or interest, as the case may be, as determined under sub-section (2) of the section 28 shall also be liable to pay a penalty equal to the duty or interest so determined. From the language of this section, it can be seen that the same is pari materia to Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. Wherein also, proviso permits benefit of reduced penalty, if the penalty at the rate of 25% of the duty is paid within period of 30 days as referred to in the first proviso. 9. The Tribunal in the instant case following its own judgment in case of CCE Vadodara V/s. Swati Chemical Industries, repor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
