9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1479X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2.2003. By letter dated 24.06.2004, they requested the Customs Department to debit the balance amount of duty against their outstanding duty liability for the months of October & November, 2003 - the demand of interest u/s 11AB is linked with the determination of duty u/s 11A of the said Act. Therefore, the demand of interest with duty is justified. Penalty - Held that: - the appellant deposite ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, subject to the adjustment of ₹ 2,43,87,787/- as deposited by them on 24.06.2004 alongwith interest and imposition of penalty. Earlier, the Tribunal by Order dated 24.03.2008 remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for fresh order. In Denovo Adjudication, the Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand of duty and appropriated the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, there is no reason for demand of interest. Further, it is submitted that there is no intention to evade payment of duty and therefore, the imposition of penalty under Rule 25 is not justified. It is also submitted that in earlier Adjudication Order, penalty of ₹ 1,00,000/- was imposed, which was enhanced in the Denovo Adjudication to ₹ 20,00,000/-. He relied upon the decision of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vember, 2003. In my considered view, the demand of interest under Section 11AB is linked with the determination of duty under Section 11A of the said Act. Therefore, the demand of interest is justified. I find force in the submission of the ld. C.A. in respect of imposition of penalty. I agree with the ld. C.A. that the amount of penalty cannot be enhanced in the Denovo proceedings un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
