9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 487X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal No.AHM-EXCUS-001-APP-71-72-2014-15 dated 10/12/2014. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. On perusal of records, it transpires that the issue is regarding confirmation of the demand of duty for clandestine removal of the finished goods during the period 08.04.2010 to 18.01.2014. It is on record that when the authorities visited the appellant's premises, on 20.01.2011, the said re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5,325/-, while setting aside the penalty imposed on the authorised signatory. 4. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the findings of the adjudicating authority indicates that the penalty proceedings initiated against the purchaser of so called clandestinely removed goods on the ground that they were not aware and that main appellant had issued the documents for such clearances which cannot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpugned order requires no interference. 6. On careful consideration of the submission made by both sides, I find that the proprietor of the firm during the panchnama recorded at the time of visit of the officers has categorically admitted that there was removal of the finished goods without discharging of the appropriate central excise duty and willing the paid an amount of Rs. 2,85,325/-. Since, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its full force and with respect following the said judgement, penalty against the appellant needs to be settled at 25% of Rs. 2,85,325/- as per the provisions of Section 11 AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, subject to the condition that the appellant dischages this amount of penalty and the interest liability on the duty of 2,85,325/- with 30 days from today. 7. Appeal stands disposed of as ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
