9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2549X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... est during the relevant time. Imposition of penalty u/r 173Q of the Erstwhile Rules - Held that: - I have gone through the provisions of Rule 173Q wherein for certain contravention by the assessee, the goods are to be held liable for confiscation and thereafter penalties are imposable. I have gone through the impugned order wherein the goods are not held liable for confiscation and penalty have been imposed on the appellant. Further, I find that no specific clause of Rule 173Q has been mentioned in the impugned order to impose penalty on the appellant. Therefore, relying on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of AMRIT FOODS Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, UP. [2005 (10) TMI 96 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], I hold that pen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This Tribunal remanded back the matter to the adjudicating authority for quantification of the demand by giving benefit of SSI exemption to the appellant thereafter to pass appropriate order in accordance with the law. In remand proceedings, the adjudicating authority gave benefit of SSI exemption and reduced the demand to the tune of ₹ 13,15,273/-. As the appellant has already paid a sum of ₹ 11,80,000/- before issuance of show cause notice, same was appropriated and remaining amount of ₹ 1,35,273/- was demanded from the appellant along with interest under Section 11AB of the Act and penalty of Rs. Three lakh was imposed on the appellant under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Against the said order, appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... effect from 28-9-1996 and the period involved is prior to that date. Therefore, the demand of interest confirmed against the appellant is set aside as there was no provision to demand interest during the relevant time. 6. Another issue arises from the arguments advanced by both the sides is of imposition of penalty under Rule 173Q of the Erstwhile Rules. I have gone through the provisions of Rule 173Q wherein for certain contravention by the assessee, the goods are to be held liable for confiscation and thereafter penalties are imposable. I have gone through the impugned order wherein the goods are not held liable for confiscation and penalty have been imposed on the appellant. Further, I find that no specific clause of Rule 173Q has bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
