2012 (10) TMI 939

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ting Authority did not incorporate the provisions of Section 11AC providing for reduced penalty in his order. The Commissioner (Appeals) wrongly reduced the penalty instead of giving option which was the proper procedure to follow. In such a situation, the obvious conclusion is that reduction of penalty by the Commissioner in the impugned order is wrong and required to be set aside. At the same ti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uty demanded as penalty if the duty, interest and penalty are paid within 30 days of his order. 2. The learned AR would submit that the Commissioner in the order has erred in reducing the penalty to 25% of duty and it is also his submission that the option to pay 25% could have been extended only by the Original Adjudicating Authority. 3. I have considered the submissions of both sides. As sub .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e this, the Tribunal can extend the benefit or not. The fact remains that the Original Adjudicating Authority did not incorporate the provisions of Section 11AC providing for reduced penalty in his order. The Commissioner (Appeals) wrongly reduced the penalty instead of giving option which was the proper procedure to follow. In such a situation, the obvious conclusion is that reduction of penalty .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X