9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (6) TMI 792X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Per : Ashok Jindal Revenue has filed this appeal against dropping of the penalty of ₹ 2,08,253/- under Section 11AC by the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. The facts of the case are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of Cast Iron Casting and Cast Steel Castings. On the basis of intelligence, Preventive Officers visited the factory premises on 10.07.2003 and recorded t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enalty of ₹ 2,08,253/- under Section 11AC was set aside following the decision of Machino Montell (I) Ltd. 2004 (62) RLT 709 wherein it was held that when the duty has been paid before issuance of show-cause notice, no penalties are imposable under Section 11AC. Aggrieved by the same, the Revenue came in appeal before me. 3. Heard both sides. 4. The learned DR submitted that it is a c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted that in this case penalty has been proposed under Rule 25 read with Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944. He further submitted that in the show-cause notice there was no proposal of mandatory penalty under Section 11AC hence the penalty under Section 11AC is not imposable. To support his contention he relied on Schrader Duncan Ltd. vs. CCE Mumbai III - 2010 (251) ELT 290 (Tri. Mumba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 944. In show-cause notice there is no proposal to penalize the respondent under Section 11AC of the Act and in the case of Schrader Duncan Ltd. (supra) this Tribunal has held that when there is a proposal under Rule 25 of the Rule no penalty can be levied under Section 11AC. As in the case of Schrader Duncan Ltd. (supra) the penal provision invoked in the show-cause notice where Rule 25 of the Rul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
