2008 (1) TMI 303

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... AC - impugned order reducing the penalty under the provisions of Rule 25 read with Sec.11AC is correct and does not require any interference – revenue’s appeal rejected - E/1156/07-Mum - A/214/2008-WZB/C-II/(SMB), - Dated:- 30-1-2008 - Shri M.V.Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Shri P.K.Katiyar SDR, for the Appellant. Shri. R.Ravindran Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : Shr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t the issue involved in this case is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs vs. Innotech Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (2007 (216) ELT 515 (Bom.)). It is his submission that, in this case the respondents had discharged the entire duty liability and interest thereon well before the issuance of show ca .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er Penalty - imposition of - payment of duty before issuance of show cause notice- Penalty whether imposable under Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 or Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - Rule 25 ibid providing for upper limit of penalty not exceeding duty leviable or Rs.10,000/- whichever is higher - Lower limit of penalty not provided in Rule 25 ibid - Section 11AC, ibid not invoke .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X