9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imposed under Section 11AC, I am in the agreement with submission of the Ld. AR that after crossing the limit of ₹ 1.50 Crores. The appellant have not taken the reasonable steps for registering themselves and discharging the excise duty. Even though the appellant have been issuing invoices but the details of clearances were not known to the department as neither any registration was obtained nor any periodical returns were filed to the department. Accordingly, there is a clear suppression of fact on the part of the appellant therefore the penalty under Section 11AC was legally imposed by the lower authority which cannot be interfered. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Appeal No. E/31 & 32/10 - A/88955-88956/17/SMB - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd be set aside. Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in the order-in-appeal upholding the order-in-original, rejected the appeal. As regard the excess payment of ₹ 89,700/- the Commissioner (Appeals) has stated that for this excess payment is entitled to seek redressal at appropriate forum. It was also fact that the appellant have opted for the proviso to Section 11AC accordingly paid the 25% of penalty thus equal penalty stand reduced to 25%. 2. None appeared on behalf of the appellants. 3. From the appeal papers it was observed that there is no contest on the demand of duty in principal. The appellant s grievance is only that the excess amount of ₹ 89,700/- should have been appropriated against the confirmed demand as the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ropriated, which was debited in Part-II thus there is excess reversal of ₹ 89,700/- for this amount the Commissioner (Appeals) has already granted the relief, that appellant to seek redressal before the appropriate authority. In my view, with this liberty granted by the Commissioner (Appeals) the appellant is free to seek re-credit of the said amount with their jurisdictional officer, therefore no further relief is due to the appellant on this account. As regard the penalty imposed under Section 11AC, I am in the agreement with submission of the Ld. AR that after crossing the limit of ₹ 1.50 Crores. The appellant have not taken the reasonable steps for registering themselves and discharging the excise duty. Even though the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
