9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 826X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... though in the Rule, there is no period of limitation - Reasonable to adopt limitation period of five years and as such, after expiry of 5 years, no penal proceedings can be initiated - Tribunal in the case of Bhawani Castings Pvt. Ltd. had taken a contrary view, on appeal being filed before Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, reversed The Tribunal judgment vide judgment reported in 2010 (4) TMI 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent discharged the monthly duty liability as determined by the department, but there was delay in payment of duty. During the period of dispute, the Rule 96 ZP (3) prescribed a penalty equal to the amount of duty is payable in case duty is not paid by the due date and on this basis, the respondent would become liable for penalty for failure to discharge duty liability by the due date. The de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... P H) set aside the penalty as in this judgement. Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court had held that though Rule 96 ZP (3) does not prescribe any period for initiating the proceedings for imposition of penalty for failure to pay the duty by the due date, the proceedings are to be initiated within 5 years and not later. Against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals), the Revenue is in appeal. The R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... May, 1999 is not sustainable. 4. I have considered the submissions of ld. Departmental Representative and have gone through the records of this case. The only dispute in this case is as to whether the penal proceedings under Rule 96 ZO(3) can be initiated after expiry of 5 years. On this point, I find that Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of Hari Concast reported in 2009 (244) ELT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
