2012 (6) TMI 610

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of these goods and there was an intention to pass on cenvat credit, merely because the appellant received the goods which were not duty paid, imposition of such harsh penalty is not justifiable - the submission of appellant that no proceedings were initiated against the manufacturer also would provoke for a lenient view as regards penalty - as no allegations of improper maintenance of accounts or .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ot reflect the material received in any of the accounts maintained by them. On the ground that appellant has knowingly received goods which did not suffer of central excise duty and did not account for the same even though he was a registered dealer, proceedings were initiated and penalty has been imposed. Since issue involved is only penalty on the appellant and I found that it can be decided at .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pted the liability and has discharged the duty liability and according to his information no further proceedings have been initiated against the manufacturer. 3. Taking note of the submissions and circumstances of the case, I find that the penalty equal to the duty imposed on the appellant is very harsh. Further even though not relevant, the submission that no proceedings were initiated agains .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X