9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 160X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 11AB - Held that:- It is to record that the section 11AB was introduced in the statute book on 28.09.1996 and the Commissioner has recorded in the impugned order that period of the present demand pertains to the period prior to such date - the duty demand has been paid by the respondent within a period of three months from the date of passing of the order and hence there is no justification to insist on payment of interest u/s 11AB. Quantum of redemption dine and penalty - Held that:- As per show cause notice the duty demand was amounting to ₹ 31,31,13,259/- while the demand as per the impugned order is ₹ 1,97,99,605/-. The adjudicating authority has also adjusted the excess and shortages which resulted in reduction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ₹ 1,97,99,605/- on 13668.790 MT of the final products found excess in the stock yards during annual stock verification during the period from 1992-1993 to 1996- 1997. 2) Imposed penalty of ₹ 20,00,000/- under rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 3) ordered for confiscation of 1531.360 MT of HR Sheet, plate coil valued at ₹ 2,46,93,417/- with option to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of ₹ 5,00,000/-. 4) Ordered for charging of interest under Section 11AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In compliance to the impugned order the respondent paid the differential duty demanded alongwith redemption fine. Aggrieved by the same Revenue has filed the present appeal mainly on the following ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Section 11AC in view of the Board Circular referred above. In any case the respondent has not challenged the penalty of ₹ 20.00 lakh imposed by the adjudicating authority, which also stand paid by them. 6. Regarding demand of interest under Section 11AB which Revenue seeks to impose in the present appeal grounds, it is to record that the section 11AB was introduced in the statute book on 28.09.1996 and the Commissioner has recorded in the impugned order that period of the present demand pertains to the period prior to such date. Consequently the adjudicating authority has imposed payment of interest under Section 11AA. However, we note that the duty demand has been paid by the respondent within a period of three months from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
