9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 1029X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... party against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. 160/C.E./GZB/2008, dated 31-7-2008. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The appellants defaulted in payment of duty due to be paid for the months of December 2006, January 2007, February 2007 and March 2007. The show cause notice dated 7-6-2007 was issued demanding duty alongwith interest and proposing penalty under Rule 25. Meanwhile they paid t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been cleared under invoices and returns were submitted, there is no question of violations attracting Rule 25(1)(a) of the Central Excise Rules. He submits that at the most the violation attract penalty under Rule 27. 5. Learned SDR submits that there has been default in payment for several months and Commissioner (Appeals) has shown leniency. He seeks upholding the order of the Commissioner ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons that there was no intention on the part of the appellants to evade duty has to be accepted as rightly held by the Commissioner (Appeals). 7. Taking the entire facts and circumstances into account, the penalty of ₹ 1 lakh sustained by the Commissioner (Appeals) is modified and reduced to ₹ 20,000/- (@ ₹ 5,000/- per each default of monthly payment) under Rule 27 of the Centr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
