9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 95X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issed - levy of interest and penalty, not correct - decided against Revenue. - C. M. A. No. 353 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 23-11-2016 - M. Sathyanarayanan And J. Nisha Banu, JJ. For Appellant : Mr. R.Nandakumar For Respondent : Mr.S.P.Maharajan for Mr.R.Karthikeyan JUDGMENT [ Judgment of the Court was delivered by M. Sathyanarayanan, J.] The appellant is the Revenue and aggrieved by the dismissal of the appeal by the Customs, Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Southern Region Bench, Chennai (in short 'CESTAT') dated 17.08.2006 holding that any interest on duty under Section 11 AB and to impose penalty under Section 11 AC cannot be levied prior to 28.09.1996 as well as rejecting the contention of the clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in complying with rigours of Evidence Act rather than applying the concept of preponderance of probabilities as per law. 2. The respondent herein was issued with a show cause notice as to materials and other goods polishing bars seized on 11.10.1996 and 12.10.1996 from various places/dealers detailed in the show cause notice and provisionally released should not be confiscated under rules 173Q and 226 of CER, 1944 and also as to the demand of duty liable and penalty along with interest. The Original Authority vide proceedings dated 29.01.1998 had confirmed the same to the tune of ₹ 46,58,289/- under Rule 9(2) read with Section 11A(2) of Central Excise Act,1944 towards the duty liability on the polishing bars manufactured and clea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... avour of the respondent and therefore, prays for interference. 3. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent would contend that the Tribunal has taken into consideration that in the absence of any interim order in CMA(MD).No.1220 of 2005 and also the fact that the plea put forth by the appellant/revenue is also covered by two decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as cited supra, has rightly reached the conclusion and accordingly, dismissed the order impugned in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and the substantial questions of law raised by the appellant deal with only the factual aspects and prays for dismissal of this appeal. 4. This Court paid its best attention to the rival submissions made on either side ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
