9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1269X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... then the Tribunal did not allow the appellant to canvass an argument that Rule 15(2) of the CCR 2004 is inapplicable. We see no perversity or error of law apparent on the face of the record in the reasoning of the Tribunal - imposition of equivalent or commensurate penalty cannot be said to be illegal or perverse - appeal dismissed. - Central Excise Appeal No. 284 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 23-1-2018 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted on the ground that even prior to the show cause notice could be issued the credit wrongly availed of was reversed and the duty as also interest was paid. The penalty should be waived. 3] The Tribunal in maintaining concurrent orders, namely, that of the Adjudicating Authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the appellants are very well conversant with the process and that is clear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e face of the record in the reasoning of the Tribunal. The concurrent findings of fact are consistent with the material placed on record. 4] The counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would rely upon the order of the Tribunal rendered in the case of LG Electronics Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune - III [2010 (255) Excise Law Times page 135]. There the show cause notice w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
