9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 1170X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hukla, Authorised Representative ORDER Per : Dr. D. M. Misra This is an appeal filed against OIA No. KS/43/SRT-II/2009 dated 18/03/2009 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax-SURAT-II . 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant are engaged in the manufacture of Pharmaceuticals Products falling under Chapter 28, 29 and 30 of CETA, 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ial amount was demanded from the appellant by issuing periodical show cause notices for the period 2003-2004, 2004-2005 & to 2005-2006. On adjudication, the demands were confirmed and penalty of equal amount imposed on the appellant. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn, partly upheld the order to the extent of confirmati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nalty under Rule 15 readwith Section 11 AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 is unwarranted. He submits that the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) has dropped the demand for the extended period of limitation. 4. Ld. A.R for the Revenue reiterated the finding of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). 5. The short point needs to be addressed is: whether penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- confirmed under Rule 15 of CCR 2004 is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944. Thus, in absence of any suppression mis-declaration, misstatements, etc. when penalty under Section 11AC ofCEA,1944 on the appellant is set aside, and no sub-rule under Rule 15 of CCR, 2004 is specified in confirming penalty, in my view ,penalty imposed under the said Rule cannot be sustained. Further, in absence of any other penal provision invoked ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
