9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 906X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent. ORDER Per: P. Venkata Subba Rao Facts of the case in brief are that the appellants herein are manufacturers of printing and writing paper, newsprint and kraft paper etc., and have being paying excise duty and filing periodical returns. During the months of March, 2013 and April, 2013 there was a delay in payment of excise duty to the tune of Rs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntravention of the provisions of Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Rules 4(1) and 6 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Aggrieved, the appeal preferred before the First Appellate Authority who, vide the impugned order, upheld the decision of the lower authority and rejected the appeal. 2. Learned Consultant for the appellant submits that the only dispute is with respect to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ultra vires by the constitutional Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat which decision was followed in other decisions including the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay and by this Bench. Accordingly, the penalty may be set aside. 3. Learned Departmental Representative brings to the attention of the Bench that the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Indsur Global Ltd., ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant is liable to penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The only point on which the Learned Consultant argues is that Rule 8(3A) has already been read down by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat and hence the demand is not sustainable. Learned Departmental Representative rightly points out that this decision has been stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. He further submit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
