9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 931X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t all on the respondent - Held that:- neither the date of receipt of the Order-in-Original nor the claim of payment of 25% as penalty within 30 days from the said date was disputed by the Commissioner (Appeals) but yet, regardless of the provisions of Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, the appellate authority chose to tinker with the quantum of penalty. Respondent did pay 25% of duty as pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmissioner(Appeals) overlooked the relevant provisions of Section 11AC of the Act. Today there is no valid contest to the respondents claim of having paid 25% of the duty as penalty within 30 days from the date of receipt of the Order - Decided against Revenue. - Appeal No.E/2475/2010 - - - Dated:- 12-10-2012 - Mr. P.G. Chacko, J. For the Appellant: Mr. N. Jagdish, Superintendent(AR) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hey stated, inter alia, that the CENVAT credit in question had been reversed and interest paid thereon on 27/03/2008. They submitted that, as the credit in question was reversed with interest prior to issue of the show-cause notice, no penalty was liable to be imposed on them. In this connection, they also stated that the availment of CENVAT credit on the same invoice a second time was due to a cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... missioner(Appeals), clearly stated that 25% of the penalty imposed by the original authority had been paid (albeit under protest) within 30 days from the date (24/12/2009) of receipt of the Order-in-Original. Though no copy of the said memorandum of appeal is available on record, one has been shown by the counsel for the respondent today and I have perused the same. It appears from the impugned or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This letter states that 25% of duty was paid as penalty on 05/01/2010, i.e. within 30 days from 24/12/2009, the date of receipt of the Order-in-Original. This letter is also accompanied by the tax payer s counterfoil indicating remittance of Rs.43,497/-. This payment is found to have been noted in the impugned order but, in the context of dealing with the penalty-related issue, the learned Commis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
