9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1089X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of section 28(6) of the Customs Act, 1962. It appears that the dereliction has been on the part of the tax authorities in failing to deposit the demand draft tendered by the appellant. The appellant has also has been subjected to interest in consequence which was also discharged without demur - the appellant is eligible to benefit of reduced penalty for having tendered duty and interest as well as penalty within the prescribed time in accordance wih section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962. Appeal allowed. - C/85316/18 - A/86583/2018 - Dated:- 9-4-2018 - Mr CJ Mathew, Member (Technical) Ms Lakshmi Menon, Advocate for appellant Shri M K Mall, Asst. Commr (AR) for respondent ORDER Per: CJ Mathew M/s Saksham Impex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... benefit of reduced penalty which, upon being carried to the Tribunal, was resolved in favour of the appellant. 3. The contention of the appellant is that eligibility to penalty of 15% is not deniable and that the failure on the part of tax authorities to encash the demand draft should not be held to their detriment. According to Learned Counsel, the tendering of demand draft, failure to encash the same and resubmission of demand draft afresh on request of departmental authorities is recorded in the order of the lower authorities. Relying upon the decision of the Tribunal in Hetero Drugs Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs [2004 (168) ELT 211 (Tri. Bang.] and Vera Laboratories Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise [2005 (180) ELT 242 (Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Genus Overseas Electronics [2003 (155) E.L.T. 541 (Tri.-LB) = 2003 (56) RLT 759 (LB)] held that payment of duty by cheque would be date of Tender of the same and not realisation following the same, the date of Tender of the demand draft would be date of payment for the duty. That the demand draft got accounted elsewhere and not as tendered by the appellants due to no fault of the appellants cannot be held to make the goods of the appellants to be non-duty paid , held submission of demand draft to be tantamount to payment by assessee. 6. From above it appears that the dereliction has been on the part of the tax authorities in failing to deposit the demand draft tendered by the appellant. The appellant has also has been subjected to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
