9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 818X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tment cannot allege suppression on the part of the respondent assessee Penalty – Held that:- Department was in the knowledge of the whole transaction inasmuch as the Government of India’s orders have been communicated to the department - question of imposition of penalty under Section 11AC does not arise - reduction of penalty cannot be faulted - E/128/2004 - A/406/2011-WZB/C-IV(SMB) - Dated:- 7-10-2011 - Shri P.R. Chandrasekharan, J. REPRESENTED BY : Shri H.B. Negi, SDR, for the Appellant. Shri A.P. Kolte, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. This is a departmental appeal directed against Order-in-Appeal No. BPS(300) 126/2003, dated 29-9-2003 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise Customs (Appeals), Aur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thereon under Section 11AB of the Act and also imposed an equivalent amount of penalty under Section 11AC of the Act read with Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 vide order dated 21-7-2003. The respondents preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the demand for duty. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that inasmuch as the respondents had paid the differential duty before the issuance of show-cause notice, no penalty under Section 11AC is imposable nor recovery of interest under Section 11AB was warranted. Accordingly, he set aside the demand for interest on the differential duty under Section 11AB and also the mandatory penalty under Section 11AC and imposed a token penalty of Rs. 2000/- on the respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ex Court in the case of Pushpam Pharmaceuticals Company v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bombay - 1995 (78) E.L.T. 401 (S.C.), Tamil Nadu Housing Board v. CCE, Madras - 1994 (74) E.L.T. 9 (S.C.) and Modipon Fibre Company v. CCE, Meerut - 2007 (218) E.L.T. 8 (S.C.). 5. I have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the instant case, it is evident from the records, that though the Government of India has issued a letter converting Levy Sugar Sale into Free Sale Sugar on 29-11-1999, the respondents discharged the duty liability only on 8-8-2001, that is almost one year and nine months after the order was issued by the Government of India. This was done only after the departmental officer pointed out the short levy to the respondents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
