9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 637X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... should be given by the adjudicating authority in the order of adjudication - option for depositing the reduced quantum of penalty by the adjudicating authority has not been provided in the adjudication order. The law is well settled that in absence of the option given by the adjudicating authority to pay reduced amount of penalty of 25%, the same can be extended by the Tribunal at appellate stage - since the adjudicating authority had not given the option to the appellant No.1 to deposit the entire duty alongwith interest and 25% of penalty in the order dated 17.12.2008 and the appellant had suo moto deposited such amount at the time of filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), the benefit of the reduced amount of penalty as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore filing the appeal, the entire amount of duty, interest and 25 % of penalty were deposited by the appellant No.1. The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the adjudged demand confirmed in the adjudication order. 3. The ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the adjudication order has not given the option to deposit 25% of penalty within 30 days from the date of such order. Since 25% of penalty was deposited by the appellant before filing the first appeal, such deposit of penalty amount should be considered as sufficient compliance for the purpose of Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and thus, no further penalty is required to be paid by the appellant No.1. To support such stand, ld. Advocate has relied on va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rovisions of the Act or the Rules made there-under, with intent to evade payment of duty. The first proviso appended to Section 11AC provides that if the duty determined under sub-section (2) of Section 11A and the interest payable thereon is paid within 30 days from the date of communication of the adjudication order, the amount of penalty liable to be paid by such person shall be 25 % of the duty so determined. On perusal of such statutory provisions, it reveals that option for depositing the reduced quantum of penalty by the adjudicating authority has not been provided in the adjudication order. However, there were various judicial pronouncements by this Tribunal as well as the Hon ble High Courts, ruling that the deposit of the reduced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on to the appellant No.1 to deposit the entire duty alongwith interest and 25% of penalty in the order dated 17.12.2008 and the appellant had suo moto deposited such amount at the time of filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), the benefit of the reduced amount of penalty as per the judgment dated 25.11.2014 of Hon ble Apex Court can be extended at the appellate state. Accordingly, the impugned order to the extent of imposition of 100% penalty under Section 11AC is set aside and the amount of 25% deposited by the appellant is considered appropriate for the purpose of Section 11AC ibid. 7. With regard to imposition of penalties on appellant No.2 3, I find that considering the circumstances of the case and the quantum of r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
