9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 695X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt, I proceed to decide the appeal itself with the consent of both the sides. 2. As per facts on record respondents delayed the payment of duty in terms of provision of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rule 8(1) of 2002. Subsequently the entire duty were paid by them after a long period with interest. In the said circumstances, Revenue initiated proceedings against the respondent, which culminated into passing of an order by the original adjudicating authority confiscating the goods already cleared with redemption fine of Rs. 4.5 lakh and imposed penalty of Rs. 5000/- on M/s. Byte Communication Pvt. Ltd. and Rs. 9 lakh on Shri Arvind Narula Managing Director of the Company. 3. On appeal against the stay order, Commissioner (Appeals) set asid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... May-08 5,22,334/- 98,977/- 15th June, 2008 15th July, 2008 6th Dec, 2008 June-08 20,25,841/- 2,92,127/- 15th July, 2008 14th Aug, 2008 6th Dec, 2008 Aug-08 1,65,388/- 23,849/- 15th Sept, 2008 15th Oct, 2008 6th Dec, 2008 Sept-08 3,02,990/- 43,691/- 15th Oct, 2008 14th Nov, 2008 6th Dec, 2008 Nov-08 2,02,739/- 29,235/- 15th Dec, 2008 ---- 6th Dec, 2008 Total 87,57,789 6.1 Thus, it was observed that BCPL had violated the provisions of sub-rule 3 and (3 A) of Rule 8 of Central Excise Rules 2002 for the period July 2007 to November 2008 as duty w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by them. As such, the duty liability stands duly cover on the record and it was not a clandestine removal. The only lapse on the part of the assessee was not to deposit the dues within a period in terms of the provision of Rule 8(1) of Central Excise Rule. The said lapse stand admitted by the respondent and the duty was subsequent paid along with interest. Payment of interest is admittedly penal in action and is in the nature of compensation for the lose of Revenue. As such, when the goods already stands cleared by the assessee and are no longer available for confiscation, imposition of redemption fine was neither justified nor warranted, as correctly held by first appellate authority. 6. As regard penalty I find that the Tribunal in the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
