9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 526X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1.03.2005. After examining the relevant records, the Appellant issued a certificate dated 31.03.2005. It is found that this certificate was not relied upon in the impugned order. The impugned order refers a Chartered Accountant Certificate dated 30.06.2007 certifying the additions in plant and machinery, which was not issued by the Appellant. Thus, the Appellant has not abetted the offence, if any, committed by the company in claiming the benefit of exemption provided under Notification 20/2007-CE dated 20.04.2007. Accordingly, the penalty imposed on the Appellant is not sustainable and hence set aside the same. The penalty imposed on the Appellant under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 set aside - appeal allowed. - HON ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... basis of which the said assessee has taken ineligible exemption under Notification 20/2007-CE dated 20.04,2007. Accordingly, penalty under Rule 26 was proposed on the Appellant in the Notice. The Notice was adjudicated vided impugned order dated 24.02.2012, wherein the adjudicating authority imposed penalty of Rs.50,000/- on the Appellant. 4. Shri. Mayur Agarwal, son of the Appellant appeared for the hearing and stated that the notice was issued to M/s. Kitply Industries on the basis of the allegation that the company have wrongly claimed the increase in value of plant and machinery and claimed the exemption provided under Notification 20/2007-CE dated 20.04.2007, on the basis of the certificate issued by the Appellant. He stated that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... specified the purpose for which the certificate was issued by him. He stated that the M/s. Kitply Industries have asked them to verify their books of Accounts and value the plant and machinery of the company as on 31.03.2005. After examining the relevant records, the Appellant issued a certificate dated 31.03.2005. We find that this certificate was not relied upon in the impugned order. Para 14 of the impugned order refers a Chartered Accountant Certificate dated 30.06.2007 certifying the additions in plant and machinery, which was not issued by the Appellant. Thus, we find that the Appellant has not abetted the offence, if any, committed by the company in claiming the benefit of exemption provided under Notification 20/2007-CE dated 20.04. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
