9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 233X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... posed upon the assessee under Section 11A( 1) of the Central Excise Act by the Joint Commissioner, Central Excise. Penalty of ₹ 15,754/- was imposed by him. Against the said order, appeal was preferred by the assessee. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and deleted the penalty. However, the demand of excise duty of ₹ 15,754/- was upheld. The said order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e year 2010, the Circulars would apply even to the pending appeal. - Decided against Revenue - Tax Appeal No. 289 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 13-1-2015 - Vijay Manohar Sahai, CJ And R. P. Dholaria,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr Darshan M Parikh, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr D K Trivedi, Adv. ORDER We have heard learned advocate Mr. Darshan M. Parikh for the appellant and learned adv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder was challenged before the Central Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The Tribunal set aside the excise duty. This Tax Appeal has been filed by the Department challenging the order of the CESTAT. It is not disputed by the appellant's counsel that the amount of excise duty imposed upon the assessee is less than ₹ 2 lakh and in view of the Circulars issued by the Departm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
