9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (9) TMI 666X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Revenue is directed against the Order No. 236/PAT/C. EX/APPEAL/2003 dated 2.7.2003 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise, Patna. The Revenue has prayed to set aside the above Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Patna and to uphold the Order-in-Original of the lower authority. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- 1.1 M/s. SAI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion and might have occurred due to short receipt, more burning loss etc. The Revenue was satisfied with the duty calculation and found the same in order. However, for the purposes of imposition of penalty, a demand-cum-show cause notice was issued to the appellant company on 28.8.2001. The lower authority confirmed the demand of ₹ 3,07,040.00 (Rupees three lakh seven thousand and forty) and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in short was removed without payment of duty and without observing the prescribed procedure with intention to evade duty. The contention of the Revenue is that penalty and interest should not be set aside, merely because the duty had been paid before issuance of the show cause notice. 2. I have heard Shri T.K. Kar, learned SDR for the Revenue. He has simply reiterated the Grounds of Appeal filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns of the Tribunal support the above view:- (a) 2001 (45) RLT949=2001 (133) ELT 489 in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Patna vs. Rama Expo invest (P) Ltd.; (b) 1997 (23) RLT 428 (CEGAT)=1998 (99) ELT 153 in the case of Shanti Vrat & Sons Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kanpur; (c) 1990 (48) ELT 460 in the case of Associated Cylinder Industries Ltd. vs. Collector of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rove the charge of clandestine removal. Therefore, I agree with the Commissioner (Appeals) that the respondents case is squarely covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kripal Springs (I)Ltd. reported in 2001 (133) ELT 782 (T). In that case, payment of duty has taken place before issue of demand. In the circumstances, both Section 11AC and Section 11AB are not attracted for impositi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
