9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 641X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of penalty of ₹ 35,000/- under Rule 571(4) of the Central Excise Rules, is set aside and the matter is remanded to the third respondent for arriving at a correct value, as it is contended that cum-duty price ought to have been taken into consideration - appeal allowed by way of remand. - W.P.No.11717 of 2004 And W.P.M.P.No.13773 of 2004 - - - Dated:- 11-7-2017 - MR. T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is concerned and it held that such denial was not tenable and set aside such findings. If the Tribunal had come to such conclusion, then obviously, the Tribunal ought to have given relief to the petitioner from penalty of equivalent amount namely ₹ 76,540/-. However chose to given partial relief of ₹ 35,000/-. When the main issue relating to denial of Modvat credit itself was set-aside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gal issue, based on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the value ought to be re-determined, accordingly, by the third respondent. 5. In the light of the above, the writ petition is allowed and the order directing levy of penalty of ₹ 35,000/- under Rule 571(4) of the Central Excise Rules, is set aside and the matter is remanded to the third respondent for arriving at a correc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
