9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (6) TMI 536X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the Respondent. ORDER This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. PI/62/06, dated 20-2-2006 vide which the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the demand of the duty and confirmation of the interest against the respondents but set aside the penalty imposed under Section 11AC on the respondent. The respondents is not in appeal against the confirmation of demand and the interest. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the submissions made by the ld. SDR and perused the records. It is seen from the records that the demand of the duty has arisen on the respondents for availing the benefit of exemption notification, wrongly, without fulfilling conditions stipulated therein and there was a issue of cenvatable inputs. Despite this, after being pointed out, the respondents paid entire amount of duty and interest. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aws, supra, where it has been held that "when the duty is paid before the issue of show cause notice, the question of levy of interest under Section 11AB and penalty under Section 11AC does not arise". In the present case, I find that the appellants had paid the Central Excise duty of ₹ 5,22,453/- and interest of ₹ 2,06,410/- on 31-3-2003, whereas show cause notice was issued on 6-7-20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
