9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 193X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeared for the appellant. Accordingly we have heard learned DR and have gone through the appeal papers. 2. It is seen that the original Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand of duty of Rs. 7,81,432/- alongwith the interest of Rs. 1,04,375/-. In addition he imposed penalty under Section 11AC (1) (a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 to the extent of the duty confirmed. However, the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the deposit of balance 75% penalty, when the present appeal stand filed by the appellant consequent to the Revenues such action, with a delay of 134 days. 4. The appellants contention is that in as much as they had deposited the entire duty, interest alongwith 25% penalty, they were under the impression that the matter stands finalized and they would not be required to pay 75% of the balance a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is a bonafide reason. We accordingly condone the delay and allow the COD application. 6. We further find that the appellant have deposited the duty, interest and 25% penalty. We accordingly waive the condition of pre-deposit of the 75% penalty, though we are of the view that there is no requirement to impose such penalty. 7. We also proceeded to decide the appeal itself, in as much as the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
